I have been looking at the code for UMAPfs... I am trying to understand conceptually why it is so unstable... It looks straightforward enough as simply passing the calls it receives on to the FS below it, almost like it didn't exist at all. Why does this cause problems? Isn't the only difference between a UMAP/UNION FS and a "native" FS an additional stack frame in the kernel?
(As I am starting to wrap up this FS adventure, I am looking to start another:) -- David Cross | email: cro...@cs.rpi.edu Systems Administrator/Research Programmer | Web: http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~crossd Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, | Ph: 518.276.2860 Department of Computer Science | Fax: 518.276.4033 I speak only for myself. | WinNT:Linux::Linux:FreeBSD To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
