Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 13 Mar 2000 04:41:21 +0100 (CET) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: patch: reiserfs for 2.3.49 |
| |
On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
> [..] IMNSHO reiserfs in the official tree right now is the worst >thing one can do to VFS. [..]
The _only_ VFS change involved in the 2.3.x reiserfs port is this:
- sb->s_op->read_inode(inode); + + /* reiserfs specific hack right here. We don't + ** want this to last, and are looking for VFS changes + ** that will allow us to get rid of it. + ** -- mason@suse.com + */ + if (sb->s_op->read_inode2) { + sb->s_op->read_inode2(inode, opaque) ; + } else { + sb->s_op->read_inode(inode); + } [..] @@ -694,6 +698,14 @@ */ struct super_operations { void (*read_inode) (struct inode *); + + /* reiserfs kludge. reiserfs needs 64 bits of information to + ** find an inode. We are using the read_inode2 call to get + ** that information. We don't like this, and are waiting on some + ** VFS changes for the real solution. + ** iget4 calls read_inode2, iff it is defined + */ + void (*read_inode2) (struct inode *, void *) ; void (*write_inode) (struct inode *); void (*put_inode) (struct inode *); void (*delete_inode) (struct inode *); That's not nice indeed but it's also obviously safe and non very intrusive. It's definitely _not_ the "worst thing one can do to the VFS" IMHO :).
Andrea
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |