unix domain sockets on nullfs(5)

[Konstantin Belousov]

On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 04:36:50PM +0300, Mikolaj Golub wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 19:16:08 +0000 Robert N. M. Watson wrote:
> 
>  RNMW> On 25 Feb 2012, at 17:48, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> 
>  >>> I am thinking now about 'MFC after'. Thanks to jhb's spare vops it looks like
>  >>> it is possible to merge it in stable/9 without breaking the KBI, but then I
>  >>> will consume 3 of 5 available spare vops. So is it worth doing?
>  >> I do not think that we shall be so restrained on the use of spare VOPs.
> 
>  RNMW> I think the only real question here is whether John had specific things
>  RNMW> in mind when he added the spares, or whether they are open for general
>  RNMW> use. Assuming they are open for general use, this use seems a quite
>  RNMW> beneficial one :-).
> 
> I am going to MFC VOP_UNP_* operations (r232317) and this is just to ask the
> last time if someone sees problems with this or would like to reserve them for
> other things.
> 
> Also could you please look at the merge diff I am going to commit if it looks
> ok?

Looks fine.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/attachments/20120422/86819bdf/attachment.pgp