Re: [PATCH 0/2] kill bhv_vnode_t

[Russell Cattelan <cattelan@thebarn.com>]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 04:53:17PM -0500, Russell Cattelan wrote:
>   
>> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>     
>>> Dave complained today that the fate of bhv_vnode_t isn't entirely clear
>>> yet, so I've prepared these two patches to kill it in a minimally
>>> invasive way.  While it causes churn in a lot of areas it does not
>>> affect the generated code at all.
>>>
>>>  
>>>       
>> I know a bunch of stuff has gone in that is not very portable, which is 
>> fine since
>> they can be dealt with individually since they are not that intrusive.
>>
>> Changing bhv_vnode_t to struct inode throughout the code is a pretty big
>> change and would be a major pain to work around.
>>     
>
> Have you actually looed at the patches?  The only places where we use
> struct inode outside of linux-2.6/ are:
>
>  - xfs_finish_reclaim:
>
> 	Distangles the xfs_inode from Linux inode.  Per defintion
> 	OS-specific.
>
>  - xfs_sync_inodes:
>
> 	 Sync code that is quite OS specific.  Dave will move it
> 	 to linux-2.6/ pretty soon.
>
>  - quota/xfs_qm_syscalls.c:
>
> 	Similar sync code.
>
>  - xfs_acl.c:
>
> 	ACL code with some OS dependencies, and pretty dead with my
> 	pending patch to use the generic ACL code.
>
> And no, it's not actually a big change.
>
>   
I guess it's not that big of a change anymore.
I really need to find some time and get fbsd synced up with the latest 
xfs code.

-Russell