Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 09:36:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 09:36:07 -0400 Received: from phoenix.mvhi.com ([195.224.96.167]:1544 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 09:36:06 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 14:41:55 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Mark Peloquin Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com, evms-devel@lists.sf.net Subject: Re: Linux v2.5.42 Message-ID: <20021013144155.A16668@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Mark Peloquin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com, evms-devel@lists.sf.net References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from markpeloquin@hotmail.com on Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 12:14:25PM -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 988 Lines: 19 On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 12:14:25PM -0500, Mark Peloquin wrote: > I guess it comes down to the point of whether the block layer should evolve > to also handle volume management generically, or whether volume management > is separate component that utilizes and works with the block layer. > > Linus, if you feel that volume management and the block layer can and should > be separate components that work together, then EVMS is ready today, No, it's not. Even if this design stands the code still has many issues. Neverless even if we don't want separate representations of intermediate volmes and topmost volumes, the voulme managment should not be part of a driver but higher leve, i.e. separated out from the evms common library code. - 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/