It's autumn[0] already and even with 2.6.32 not quite ready yet, let me
be the one asking the inevitable question:
What are the plans for reiser4 being included in 2.6.33? The
diffstat for the 2.6.31 patch looks rather promising, at least to me:
$ diffstat reiser4-for-2.6.31.patch | grep -v fs/reiser4
Documentation/Changes | 12
Documentation/filesystems/reiser4.txt | 75
fs/Kconfig | 1
fs/Makefile | 1
fs/fs-writeback.c | 5
include/linux/fs.h | 3
include/linux/mm.h | 1
mm/filemap.c | 3
mm/page-writeback.c | 26
170 files changed, 77581 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Or maybe it can find a place in -staging if there are still strong
objections against a general inclusion?
Thanks,
Christian.
[0] http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&m=124904274311847&w=2
--
BOFH excuse #70:
nesting roaches shorted out the ether cable
As I told already for reiser4 inclusion we need the following:
(a) plugin design document;
(b) full description of what is going on in respond to memory
pressure notifications;
The (a) is not yet ready and I don't have a time to explain
personally to everyone why the plugin stuff is not crappy. It will
be posted in a magazine with proper background, because all
Namesys projects traditionally have academic sources. So wait...
Actually there is no hurry. Taking into account common situation
with file systems, I am not afraid that reiser4 will get obsolete.
Thanks,
Edward.
Christian Kujau wrote:
> It's autumn[0] already and even with 2.6.32 not quite ready yet, let me
> be the one asking the inevitable question:
> What are the plans for reiser4 being included in 2.6.33? The
> diffstat for the 2.6.31 patch looks rather promising, at least to me:
>
> $ diffstat reiser4-for-2.6.31.patch | grep -v fs/reiser4
> Documentation/Changes | 12
> Documentation/filesystems/reiser4.txt | 75
> fs/Kconfig | 1
> fs/Makefile | 1
> fs/fs-writeback.c | 5
> include/linux/fs.h | 3
> include/linux/mm.h | 1
> mm/filemap.c | 3
> mm/page-writeback.c | 26
> 170 files changed, 77581 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Or maybe it can find a place in -staging if there are still strong
> objections against a general inclusion?
>
> Thanks,
> Christian.
>
> [0] http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&m=124904274311847&w=2
>
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 at 14:50, Edward Shishkin wrote:
> (a) plugin design document;
> (b) full description of what is going on in respond to memory
> pressure notifications;
>
> The (a) is not yet ready and I don't have a time to explain
> personally to everyone why the plugin stuff is not crappy.
Is this still a must-have? I.e. are there still strong objections against
the plugin design? And even if so, most of this happens in fs/reiser4
anyway I suppose, so the "evil" plugins are well contained :)
As for (b), can't this be documented at a later point as well?
What about the technical issues, mentioned in the latest TODO list[0]
earlier this year? Are there any real show-stoppers left?
Andrew (Cc'ed) had this in -mm for a longer time now, maybe he can
comment (once again) what's left to do from his POV?
Thanks,
Christian.
[0] http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&m=124069989217533&w=2
--
BOFH excuse #323:
Your processor has processed too many instructions. Turn it off immediately, do not type any commands!!