Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 6 Jan 2003 09:43:17 +0000 | Subject | Re: [lvm-devel] dm fs? | From | Joe Thornber <> |
| |
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 04:37:28PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > What is the status of dmfs going into mainline? > > I saw that Greg KH posted a patch with some corrections to dmfs for > 2.5.50? > > IMO it would be nice to have a kernel config option that makes the > ioctl method optional when dmfs is set to y or m in kernel config. > That will not only save a bit of code space, but it will also serve to > encourage use of dmfs. :)
The last version I released is here:
http://people.sistina.com/~thornber/patches/2.5-unstable/2.5.51/2.5.51-dmfs-1.tar.bz2
There are still a couple of easy to fix issues with it (eg. the kmalloc while a spin lock is held that Andrew Morton pointed out :).
Both Andrew Morton and Greg KH expressed concerns with the way I've mapped the dm semantics onto the filesystem (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=103975736919315&w=2). So Greg is currently trying to get a sysfs interface working.
We need to get a concensus of opinion in the community as to what is a good interface. I'm not going to be rushed into including something in dm that could cause critism for years to come. dmfs is what Alasdair Kergon and I have proposed, we're just waiting for an alternative to kick off the discussions ATM.
- Joe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |