In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill
Studenmund writes:
>Whew! That's reasuring. I agree there are things which need fixing. It'd
>be nice if both NetBSD and FreeBSD could fix things in the same way.
Well, >that< still remains to be seen...
>> >> The use of the "vfs_default" to make unimplemented VOP's
>> >> fall through to code which implements function, while well
>> >> intentioned, is misguided.
>>
>> I beg to differ. The only difference is that we pass through
>> multiple layers before we hit the bottom of the stack. There is
>> no loss of functionality but significant gain of clarity and
>> modularity.
>
>If I understood the issue, it is that the leaf fs's (the bottom ones)
>would use a default routine for non-error functionality. I think Terry's
>point (which I agree with) was that a leaf fs's default routine should
>only return errors.
I beg to differ. It is far more likely, in my mind, that you will
want to handle a currently existing, unimplemented VOP than add a
new one. Using the default for >all< unimplemented VOPs makes this
possible, using the same logic which makes adding a VOP possible.
Go back and review the diffs from when I did this, and my other
argument why this is a good idea should be obvious.
>I doubt we need more than 64 bit times. 2^63 seconds works out to
>292,279,025,208 years, or 292 (american) billion years. Current theories
>put the age of the universe at I think 12 to 16 billion years. So 64-bit
>signed times in seconds will cover from before the big bang to way past
>any time we'll be caring about. :-)
But we cannot do time in seconds resolution, we need to resolve at least
the cpu clock frequency, which right now is approaching 1GHz (30bit!)
--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
