Subject: Re: ufs-ism in lookup(9)
To: YAMAMOTO Takashi <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/22/2004 10:11:41
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 11:00:37PM +0900, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> > > I definitely think the "no way to see" aspect is bad. I think there m=
> > > still be value in keeping the removal, but we definitely should let t=
> > > know there was/is an entry.
> i made a less-intrusive version. (attached)
> it introduces a new function, cache_lookup_raw(), for
> filesystems which want more flexibility.
> otoh, it keeps cache_lookup() as-is so that filesystems which prefer
> the current "kind" behaviour won't need to be changed.
> is it acceptable for you?
Sure. While I think it'd be nice to eventually merge the behaviors and=20
come up with one routine that works well for both (perhaps with a flag to=
choose behaviors), but I don't have time to do that now and I'd like to=20
let you make progress.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----