YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
>> YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
>>>>> what you are proposing seems like another kind of open/close to me.
>>>>> VOP_OPEN and VOP_CLOSE are appropriate ways to handle them.
>>>>>
>>>>> YAMAMOTO Takashi
>>>> can you explain what VOP_OPEN() should we add flags to in case of swap
>>>> device or raidframe? I'm not sure I follow your logic just yet...
>>>>
>>>> -e.
>>> in the case of swap, the one in swap_on().  i'm not sure about raidframe.
>>>
>>> YAMAMOTO Takashi
>> raidframe can be a problem with your approach I'm afraid.
> 
> why it isn't a problem with yours?
> 
> YAMAMOTO Takashi

because to get the 'vp' for the device we don't have to rely on VOP_OPEN
and can use vfinddev(), or the interface can simply be changed to take a
different parameter.

btw: did you mean adding another parameter, or adding a flag to the
'mode'?

-e.