Subject: Re: diffs for UVM/UBC improvements available
To: Bill Studenmund <>
From: Greywolf <>
List: tech-kern
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
# code.
# Take care,
# Bill

NetBSD:  Flying into the heart of the Sun.  And the i386, and Alpha, and
	Mac, and PowerPC, and...