lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: patch: reiserfs for 2.3.49
    On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > On Tue, 14 Mar 2000, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
    > >
    > > Can you run _all_ of the above at the same time on a a large machine
    > > will gobs and ram and multiple processors? With the file
    > > creation/deletion -- are you doing this to the same directories from
    > > multiple threads at once?
    >
    > Now, now, don't be too harsh on the resierfs guys.

    I was the one complaining about the tests Chris is referring to - but my
    complaint wasn't that the ReiserFS guys had failed to nuke the code, or
    were being less than thorough. Rather, I just pointed out these tests
    didn't address the original complaint at all - they were the wrong tests
    to begin with.

    > Do we suddenly expect code to be bug-free before inclusion into the
    > kernel?

    I hope not - there wouldn't be much kernel left if that were strictly
    applied :-)

    > For rather obvious PR reasons I'd love to say "yes, we have a journalling
    > filesystem these days" as part of the 2.4.x release stuff, so it does fall
    > under the "drivers so cool that they might make it into 2.4.x". I don't
    > think I want to see the read_inode() changes, though, that's just too
    > ugly. I may like the PR angle of reiserfs, but that doesn't mean that I'd
    > forget about things like these completely.

    A journalling FS would definitely be a desirable feature. ISTR the VFS
    update is being worked on now - with that done, the FS should be OK for
    inclusion?

    Personally, I want to see ReiserFS included as soon as possible - provided
    it can be done cleanly.

    > But it looks to me as if the read_inode thing plus a few cleanups in
    > raiserfs to take into account that the VFS layer does more these days
    > would certainly make it a candidate for inclusion. Maybe not 2.4.0, but
    > during 2.4.x. Don't be so down on the guys, there are people who really
    > like actively using raiserfs..

    Any idea of relative timescale for 2.4.0 vs. fixing ReiserFS? ISTR someone
    suggested a week or so for ReiserFS having the VFS layer fixed - is this
    realistic, and could this make it into the kernel early enough for 2.4.0??

    Sorry if I seemed a bit hostile to ReiserFS earlier in the week - quite
    the opposite, I want to see it in - but not before it is ready.


    James.


    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:3.784 / U:0.072 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site