Matthew Dillon wrote:
> Well, I'm not sure what you mean by the 'direct IO style'. The
> NFS server side operates as a mostly generic layer on top of
> whatever filesystem is being exported. The issues are related
> more to secondary filesystems like NTFS not being properly
> implemented (and that's the story with VFS in general). Eventually
> we will be able to run these secondary filesystems in userland
> to make the system less vulnerable to panics, but for now we are
> stuck with kernel implementations.
>
>
>
I mean that, if it works fine locally but not as an NFS export,
something is being overcomplicated; maybe for a good reason but this is
still a problem overall. A userland NFS would fix this, or a
sufficiently simple kernel NFS (too late now).
Is it DragonFly's goal to move anything sensible into the userland where
possible? I've seen this mind share among a few of the other developers.
It makes a lot of sense for serving tasks like NFS, but I've had
mentioned that it should also handle some low-overhead tasks the kernel
has to do even for devices (moused, for instance). Where is the line drawn?
Dmitri Nikulin