Date: Sun, 16 Jul 1995 16:33:55 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: hackers@freebsd.org, terry@cs.weber.edu Subject: Re: FS root mount handling discrepancy Message-ID: <199507160633.QAA17212@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Currently, the routine inittodr() is called as the last act of the >routine ffs_mountroot. >The purpose of this call is to (apparently) cause a Sun-style "clock >has lost NNN days" message to occur on the system console after a >boot after a period of no activity. The timestamp passed to inittodr() is currently only used if the RTC is broken. >The discrepancy is that the ffs_mountroot routine is the *only* one >of all of the root mount routines that calls this routine to cause >the message to appear (both the MFS and CD9660 filesystems support >root mounts). mfs_mountroot() and nfs_mountroot() call inittodr() too. Volatile and readonly file systems won't have a useful timestamp to call it with. >What I would like to do: >I would like to add a time_t to the struct mount and cause the file >system specific mount to fill the value out (or not) based on it's >own choice of semantics. The point in doing this is that it's the >cleanest way to abstract this behaviour in a more general way and >to imply to future file system writes that this field should be This seems reasonable. >filled out. The default value of 0 (mount structures are bzero'ed >by the xxx_rootmount and xxx_mount routines when they are allocated) >would cause the routine to not be called, so the semantics would not >cange for file systems where thelast written time being an arbitrary >period in the past is irrelevant. I think it currently must be called even when the timestamp is 0. It doesn't get called except by mountroot routines. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199507160633.QAA17212>