Subject: Re: dupfd hack and clonable devices
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Christos Zoulas <email@example.com>
Date: 11/18/2004 10:01:32
On Nov 18, 3:06pm, firstname.lastname@example.org (email@example.com) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: dupfd hack and clonable devices
| > >Or do what SVR4 (and probably solaris do) which is to give VOP_OPEN
| > >and extra parameter so that the FS dependant code can return a
| > >different vnode from the one that was retirned by the lookup.
| > I did almost that in 1.5 vnode_if.src. I passed the extra fd.
| > It was backed out.
| Do you know why? The CVS log is completely useless (about as useless
| as saying "delete file" for cvs delete file), and I don't see any
| discussion on tech-kern about its removal.
I forget; I think it was along the lines "this is a corner case and we
don't want to have to change the open routine of each driver to take
an extra argument". You can ask mycroft for the details if he remembers.