On 4/12/07, Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Apr 11, 2007, at 5:42 PM, Dean Anderson wrote:
> So, I suspect the question should be: Could the afs kernel module be
> turned into a driver with an ioctl? There's a lot in there, and if
> anything breaks the general premise that a system call can be cast
> as an
> ioctl, this would probably be it...
This would cure a lot of problems for us. Making OpenAFS Zones-
compatible in Solaris is one of them.
A afs psudeo device in Solaris would be the best of both worlds... we
don't have to play grab-ass with syscall numbers every other Solaris
rev, it's easier to implement/maintain, it's still our own interface,
and we do things the same way that pretty much everything else in the
world does it.
I betcha we can also register "/dev/afs" with Sun so that they don't
step on that namespace. Either way it would be far easier than asking
them to put aside a reserved syscall number for a 3rd party app such
as ours. Asking for *that* would probably gets us a "not no, but hell
no" response.
So, yeah, the AFS syscall is an anachronism that just needs to have a
fork stuck in it, plain and simple.
I can't agree with this until benchmarks show the performance
degredation of moving everything to ioctls is not statistically
significant. There are changes going into the tree which will make
afs_syscall a signficant factor in system performance for all aspects
of OpenAFS.
--
Tom Keiser
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
