--nextPart2046647.WfWNsqTuRF
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
On Thursday, 10. February 2005 00:23, Simon 'corecode' Schubert wrote:
> yep, sure. but i got the feeling that we in fact need fake vnodes, so
> that we are able to reroute the vop calls so that we can shape up fake
> namecache entries, right?
uhm thinking of that: if we fake up vnodes, we can't attach the namecache=20
entries to the underlying vnode, because, well, the upper vnode needs the=20
namecache entry already...
while it would really be slick to do it without fake vnodes, i can't see=20
how it could work. and with fake vnodes we need another link for the=20
corresponding namecache entries.
maybe:
/* in struct namecache: */
struct namecache *nc_shadowgrp;
/* Walk the circly linked group of shadowing namecache entries */
sncp =3D ncp;
while ((sncp =3D sncp->nc_shadowgrp) !=3D NULL && sncp !=3D ncp)
/* invalidate or whatever */
cheers
simon
=2D-=20
/"\
\ /
\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign
/ \ Against HTML Mail and News
--nextPart2046647.WfWNsqTuRF
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQBCCqQRr5S+dk6z85oRAlGdAJ9PP+I9nziv7DKw2BAuT8mpC9Sl7gCeIOMU
4TKJFKmp6qfSDCjXOCNKMxw=
=mGTV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart2046647.WfWNsqTuRF--