Re: Decomposing vfs_subr.c

[Mindaugas Rasiukevicius <rmind%netbsd.org@localhost>]

David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
>  > 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.
> 
> No, I'd say it's a bad idea to do a move like this partway through a
> major reorganization. It should wait until the reorg is complete and
> stable, so the complete history *of the reorg* is in one place. (That
> or it should have been done first; I would have been fine with it if
> you'd suggested it then.)

My point is - if split, which results in some history loss, then at least
do it once, rather than twice.  HEAD is stable enough for that right now.
Anyway, when are you planning to finish your namei changes?  November?

> I'm also still inclined to think we should avoid doing major reorgs
> until we have proper rename support. Otherwise, where do you stop?
> There are at least a half dozen other big reorgs waiting:

Split for this piece of VFS brings abstraction and makes code quite
easier to work with.  Lots of other code in sys/kern does not suffer
from this, or at least does not suffer that much (although it could
have more neat structure, of course).  Since I did not propose major
re-organisations, we can cut this discussion around here.

-- 
Mindaugas