Subject: Re: killing the "l" argument from vfs
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: YAMAMOTO Takashi <email@example.com>
Date: 11/26/2007 07:58:57
> In article <20071124200835.GA2143@cs.hut.fi>,
> Antti Kantee <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >I'm working on a patch which will rid the vfs interfaces of the randomly
> >teleporting "l". At least VFS_ and VOP_ will get the treatment, I still
> >need to investigate componentname. This will clarify the interfaces,
> >as currently the passed value for lwp might be NULL in some cases.
> >The new way is to fetch curlwp if it's desired (which is already done
> >in plenty of places due to "l" not being always passed)..
> >If someone has problems with this, please scream very loudly very soon.
i'm all for killing them.
> Does NFS need it? We should not take it out if we are going to put it back.
i don't think nfs is special.
i don't think there is any VOP which is appropriate to take an lwp.