Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 21 Dec 2001 15:47:26 -0800 (PST)
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To:        Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
Cc:        rsharpe@ns.aus.com, FreeBSD-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Adding si_fd to struct __siginfo ...
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0112211546320.53471-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
In-Reply-To: <20011221164429.U48837@elvis.mu.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
from memory there was also someone who put up a set of changes for oplocks
somewhere, but I have completely forgotten
who/where/how,  unless it was you....


On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, Alfred Perlstein wrote:

> * Richard Sharpe <sharpe@ns.aus.com> [011221 15:11] wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > One of my tasks is to add oplock support to FreeBSD so that we (Panasas) 
> > can allow correct caching of files by Windows clients in the presence of 
> > NFS clients using the same files.
> > 
> > We have a preliminary implementation, based on the Linux implementation, 
> > but it is a gross hack because there is no way for the kernel, when it 
> > delivers a signal, to indicate the fd that caused delivery of the signal.
> > 
> > Linux and Solaris have an fd field in struct siginfo_t which allows the 
> > kernel to indicate, for signals relating to files, to indicate which fd 
> > the signal relates to.
> > 
> > I notice that in FreeBSD struct siginfo_t seems to have int 
> > __spare__[7]; and would like to use one of those spare fields as si_fd.
> > 
> > While I can do that in our code base, if I want to contribute the OpLock 
> > code it would be useful if the FreeBSD community finds this change 
> > agreeable.
> > 
> > Are there any counter suggestions or any big objections?
> 
> There was already a big mess of a discussion about how this would
> be much better done via kqueue than with realtime signals.
> 
> I guess if you can get a working implementation that is compatible
> with the existing interfaces it would work, however it's a _much_
> better idea to use kqueue to deliver this sort of notification.
> 
> And yes, it has been discussed in the lists already.
> 
> -Alfred
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
> 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0112211546320.53471-100000>