Subject: Re: removing VOPs
To: None <email@example.com>
From: YAMAMOTO Takashi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/04/2005 13:18:12
> > > The only thing that would need changing would be an interface to add new
> > > operations in addition to those in vfs_op_descs. It'd be a touch tricky as
> > > we would need to add a slot in all the existing op tables for the new one,
> > > but it could be done.
> > i don't think it's worth to do, given locking overhead and complexity.
> What locking overhead? Also, while I see adding a new op would be a bit
> irritating to code, I don't think it's that complex. Note: I am of course
> assuming the case of only adding new operations and never removing them,
> even if the only fs that implements them gets unloaded from a kernel.
how do you add a slot in the existing v_op without locking?
> > > Well, you've listened to me and I've listened to you. We will just
> > > disagree then and I'll look forward to seeing your proposed patch.
> > i'll create a branch so you will be able to see the changes before
> > they hit the trunk.
> Ok, if that's easier for you. I thought a diff would be more than
honestly, i'm not sure why you want to see a patch.
it should be merely mechanical changes.