Subject: Re: diffs for UVM/UBC improvements available
To: Bill Studenmund <email@example.com>
From: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/29/2001 12:52:26
Would I be putting it more simply to the lesser technical than yourselves
(such as, oh, me :-) to say that the layers still need that struct lock *
drilling down to the base layer so that locking on a node will actually
work, i.e. all layers ATOP the base point down to the lock at the base
level, while the struct lock * at the base is a real lock on the node,
hence any references on any other layer will actually perform the lock op
[if they're even permitted to do that]?
Or is that not even close?
On Tue, 29 May 2001, Bill Studenmund wrote:
# More to the point, could you please not remove the struct lock * part? In
# addition to being used as a way of exporting lock information, I was
# planning on using it for some of the other things from John Heidemann's
# disseratation. If you remove it, I'll probably have to re-add it later,
# which seems like a waste.
# And as above, we have clustered file systems covered with the existing
# Take care,
NetBSD: Flying into the heart of the Sun. And the i386, and Alpha, and
Mac, and PowerPC, and...