On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 06:18:19PM +0200, Juergen Hannken-Illjes wrote: > > (In the absence of some clear benefits I don't think it's a > > particularly good idea to paste a dozen or two copies of genfs_lock > > everywhere. But folding vcrackmgr() into genfs_lock and genfs_unlock > > seems like a fine idea.) > > Primary goal is to abstract vnode locking into the vnode operations > only and therefore completely removing vlockmgr().
That I can agree with :-) > For now I can live with genfs_lock()/v_lock becoming the generic > locking interface where v_lock becomes genfs_lock()-private. and that I have no objection to. Vaguely related to which, does anyone object to wrapping VOP_UNLOCK in a vn_unlock() function (doing nothing extra), so as to be symmetric with vn_lock()? I think I've mentioned this before, but I'm not sure, and if so it was a while back... -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org