[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: reiser4 plugins
    David Masover writes:


    > Maintainability is like optimization. The maintainability of a
    > non-working program is irrelevant. You'd be right if we already had
    > plugins-in-the-VFS. We don't. The most maintainable solution for
    > plugins-in-the-FS that actually exists is Reiser4, exactly as it is now
    > - -- because it is the _only_ one that actually exists right now.

    But it is not so. There _are_ plugins-in-the-VFS. VFS operates on opaque
    objects (inodes, dentries, file system types) through interfaces:
    {inode,address_space,dentry,sb,etc.}_operations. Every file system
    back-end if free to implement whatever number of these interfaces. And
    the do this already: check the sources; even ext2 does this: e.g.,
    ext2_fast_symlink_inode_operations and ext2_symlink_inode_operations.

    This is exactly what upper level reiser4 plugins are for.

    I guess that one of Christoph Hellwig's complaints is that reiser4
    introduces another layer of abstraction to implement something that
    already exists.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-06-22 16:40    [W:0.019 / U:13.948 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site