On 8 Jan 2002, Derek Atkins wrote: > You needed to have sent this to the list, so that the people > in charge can see that there is a problem. It certainly looks > like there is a problem here. Derrick?
I'll fix in CVS and we'll get it in 1.2.3. > > Something completely different: the only real annoyance about OpenAFS is that > > so much happens in the kernel - one glitch and the system is gone. Are there > > plans to make a thinner kernel module that talks back to a userland client > > process? I don't like all the kernel-version specific modules I'm collecting > > in /usr/vice/etc/modload... We have some ideas for how to do this, basically right now the problem is our vcaches are one-to-one linked to inodes and need to be allocated by us instead of by the kernel. The idea is to use the generic_ip in the inode union to contain a weak "vcache hint" such that inodes can be managed by the kernel (and thus we no longer need to track changes to init_once) and vcaches can be managed by us independently. It's on my list but I don't have time yet. As a side effect many of the dentry cache problems on Linux (but not all of them, I think) could also be eased. -D _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
