[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gfs-devel
Subject:    Re: buffer ID 0 : DMEP spec
From:       Burn Alting <burn () comptex ! com ! au>
Date:       2000-07-20 1:21:59
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, 19 Jul 2000 12:18:11 -0500, Andrew Barry wrote

> 
> Funny that I should have to ask this, but why are we not allowing bufferID
> 0? I remember we agreed on this in dlock 0.9.6 and I kept it, but why do
> we do this? Is it just to use 0 as an unused signifier? since we have an
> explicit one do we need this? It might be better to take this limit out. 

Yes, not allowing a lock identifier of zero was a throw-back to dlock 0.9.6 (or 
0.9.5b) and it was used (or at least could be used) to indicate an UNUSED lock.

As DMEP implies an alternative design for lock allocation and use, implementors
shouldn't need such a method of indicating an unused lock. IE we can ditch this
condition (bid of zero being illegal) GIVEN the host based code doesn't 
need/want it.

Regards

Burn


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe gfs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@sistina.com
Read the GFS Howto:  http://www.globalfilesystem.org/howtos/gfs_howto/

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]