approach on getting nullfs to work again

Sat Aug 27 04:30:39 PDT 2005

[revisiting nullfs after half a year]

Matthew Dillon wrote:
:On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 02:38:30PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
:>     The idea being that instead of having nullfs fake-up
:>     vnodes (like it does in FreeBSD) we instead have it return the *actual*
:>     vnode and only fake-up the namecache topology.
:I think we still have to create "fake" vnodes because we have to catch
:and certain VOPs in the nullfs directly instead of passing them to the
:parent. One important issue is fstatfs, but the directory operations
:have similiar needs.
     Only for unionfs.  For nullfs (where no merging is taking place) I
     am pretty certain we don't have to fake file OR directory vnodes.
Alright, after reading code again and thinking about it I see that we 
don't need faked vnodes :)

This is nice, indeed.  I'll look into that after I finish my thesis in 
early september, unless somebody beats me to it :)  I can give insight 
on the inner workings of the namecache as far as I understood it, though.

cheers
  simon
--
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low $$$ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \