RFC: adding 'proxy' nodes to provider ports (with patch)

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <20090323060325.GN3102 at garage.freebsd.pl>, Pawel Jakub Dawidek write
s:

>There is still a naming problem. pp and new_pp will end up with the same
>name. I'd suggest instructing GEOM to expose only parent in /dev/.

who said the new provider had to have same name ?

>The taste is still going to be send on new class arrival and on the last
>pp write close.

We decide that.

Since we are inserting in an already open path, I think it makes very
good sense to supress tasting, at least until close.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.