Alfred Perlstein wrote: >* Richard Sharpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [011221 15:11] wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>One of my tasks is to add oplock support to FreeBSD so that we (Panasas) >>can allow correct caching of files by Windows clients in the presence of >>NFS clients using the same files. >> >>We have a preliminary implementation, based on the Linux implementation, >>but it is a gross hack because there is no way for the kernel, when it >>delivers a signal, to indicate the fd that caused delivery of the signal. >> >>Linux and Solaris have an fd field in struct siginfo_t which allows the >>kernel to indicate, for signals relating to files, to indicate which fd >>the signal relates to. >> >>I notice that in FreeBSD struct siginfo_t seems to have int >>__spare__[7]; and would like to use one of those spare fields as si_fd. >> >>While I can do that in our code base, if I want to contribute the OpLock >>code it would be useful if the FreeBSD community finds this change >>agreeable. >> >>Are there any counter suggestions or any big objections? >> > >There was already a big mess of a discussion about how this would >be much better done via kqueue than with realtime signals. > >I guess if you can get a working implementation that is compatible >with the existing interfaces it would work, however it's a _much_ >better idea to use kqueue to deliver this sort of notification. > >And yes, it has been discussed in the lists already. > OK, I will go and look at the discussion ...
-- Richard Sharpe, [EMAIL PROTECTED], LPIC-1 www.samba.org, www.ethereal.com, SAMS Teach Yourself Samba in 24 Hours, Special Edition, Using Samba To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
