Re: WAPBL and IDE mac68k

2010-06-03 Thread David Holland
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 08:31:56AM -0400, der Mouse wrote: It happens even when I try to boot to single user mode because I see the message saying /: replaying log to memory right before it panics. Not sure why the journaling stuff happens when booting in single user mode without

Re: Layered fs, vnode locking and v_vnlock removal

2010-06-03 Thread David Holland
On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 05:58:40PM +0100, David Laight wrote: In the long term VOP_xxxLOCK() should become part of the file systems. AFAIK there is a consensus between yamt@, ad@ and thorpej@ that locking should be moved down to the filesystems. There was some discussion about it

Re: Layered fs, vnode locking and v_vnlock removal

2010-06-03 Thread David Holland
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 11:44:03AM +0200, Juergen Hannken-Illjes wrote: It's not immediately clear how either of these ought to work, so I'm concerned that making the infrastructure less general will lead to problems. 1) One upper to many lower vnodes This is a file system like

Re: __read_mostly and __mp_friendly annotations

2010-06-03 Thread Tim Rightnour
The only thing I'm not sure about, is if it's safe to use an alignment of 64 on powerpc. The issue is mostly that the powerpc cpus vary wildly in cacheline sizes, and whinyness about alignment. I suspect it's not a big deal, as the kernel isn't generally as picky as the bootloader is about

Re: Layered fs, vnode locking and v_vnlock removal

2010-06-03 Thread YAMAMOTO Takashi
hi, On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 05:58:40PM +0100, David Laight wrote: In the long term VOP_xxxLOCK() should become part of the file systems. AFAIK there is a consensus between yamt@, ad@ and thorpej@ that locking should be moved down to the filesystems. There was some