Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:06:52 -0700 From: Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>, John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How to best overload the fileops ? Message-ID: <5217C0DC.8050107@rawbw.com> In-Reply-To: <201308231302.32800.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <521508F4.6030502@rawbw.com> <20130822001022.GA18115@dft-labs.eu> <52155B8D.1020807@rawbw.com> <201308231302.32800.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/23/2013 10:02, John Baldwin wrote: > There is something similar: see devfs_ops_f in sys/fs/devfs/devfs_vnops.c. devfs_ops_f is a local static fileops object for devfs. I don't see how is this similar to our situation. devfs doesn't overload any other file system, they are a file system on their own. > > I don't think we need a generic framework for this, just expose the > relevant fo_ methods for kqueue ops and use them in your epoll_ops. In epoll case, fileops object as a whole should be exposed and used for fp->f_ops, except fo_close which is overloaded. So would you think struct fileops* kqueue_fileops(); be ok then? Yuri
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5217C0DC.8050107>