On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 09:29:52AM -0600, Steve Lord wrote:
> > - in 2.4 JFS requires two memory allocations for each new inode,
> > bot just one like ext2/ext3/xfs/etc
>
> xfs does two by the way.
I would have to do three with using ->u.generic_ip then ;)
Okay, saw the vnode apropeach.
> > but given the current SGI policy/development model I don't think b)
> > is / will be a goal. It's up to Al and Linus to decide whether b) is
> > important or not, but I strongly doubt they will take an XFS patch with
> > all the mainline invasion the current version has.
>
> So, it is OK for people to rip the guts out of the VM every other week
It absoloutly is not and I'm on -ac all the time because I have huge
problems with the new VM.
> and for Al Viro to apply so many patches the filesystem API that your
> head spins, but a filesystem which does anything outside the VFS box
> is regarded as an invasion.
Al's VFS changes aren't for fun but to fix problems.
> Gutting XFS to remove all the code which would not work without kernel
> changes removes a lot of the reasons people use XFS in the first place.
This opinion is not shared my many core kernel developers. There
sometimes are core changes that make fully sense, but then you have to
axplain why they make sense and submit them separate. That's how Linux
development works. And when looking at Nathan's xattr work it looks
like SGI also is sucessfull when working this way.
Christoph
--
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.
|