David Holland <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > - I think it should be vfs_vnode.c? > > > > OK, unless somebody will come up with a better name. > > Since AIUI from chat this is going to contain the vnode lifecycle and > code and not e.g. stuff like vn_lock, I think I'd prefer vfs_vncache.c. > But, vfs_vnode.c is definitely better than vfs_node.c.
vfs_vnode.c then. > > Speaking of structural clean ups - I am thinking about moving vfs_*.c > > into a separate src/sys/vfs directory. Given that clean code history > > of vfs_subr.c is already damaged (*cough*pooka*cough*) and decomposing > > will do more - it might be worth going all the way. > > Well, forcibly moving vfs_lookup.c right now (or anytime in the near > future) would be a bad idea, so let's not. After that stuff > stabilizes, perhaps we can. Though I'd kind of prefer having real > rename support before launching on major reorgs. I would say better move early, so the history of your further changes will be preserved. Rather than you make changes, and then history gets cut. -- Mindaugas
