From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Sep 12 14:10:31 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFAF237B405; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 14:10:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B404143E4A; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 14:10:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id 88F0BAE23A; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 14:10:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 14:10:25 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Bruce Evans Cc: Nate Lawson , phk@FreeBSD.ORG, des@FreeBSD.ORG, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PATCH: vnode->v_tag to const char * Message-ID: <20020912211025.GJ21806@elvis.mu.org> References: <20020912202409.Y5891-100000@gamplex.bde.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020912202409.Y5891-100000@gamplex.bde.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Bruce Evans [020912 03:36] wrote: > > > The only other option I considered was checking v_op == nfsv2_vnodeop_p > > but that has huge problems in that the vops for NFS are only present when > > NFS is loaded. > > > > If you have a better solution, I'm open to it. > > I guess the global is the least of evils. Wouldn't most of the 'nfs' specific hacks be applicable to other remote fs's? So then why not just a 'nfslike' flag where it is needed? -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message