[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: patch: reiserfs for 2.3.49

    On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

    > 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 :).

    Sigh... Once more: if reiserfs being badly out of sync with VFS is OK I
    see no point in having it in the tree. Otherwise I see a _lot_ of
    problems, since it's *badly* out-of-sync. For values of badly greater than
    one year. Maintaining this code is going to be a nightmare. And I have a
    nasty feeling that whoever will do VFS work will end up with either
    1) saying "fsck it, I don't care for breakage" (see above) _or_
    2) having to do full analysis of locking/races/etc. in the damn
    thing, figuring out whether some smart-arse code in depth of journal
    handling actually does race prevention, etc. and then doing update.

    I'm sorry, but IMO it's the work for people who propose the inclusion of
    patch. _Before_ such inclusion.

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

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.048 / U:10.184 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site