Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751052AbWHIPsj (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 11:48:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751051AbWHIPsj (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 11:48:39 -0400 Received: from 63-162-81-179.lisco.net ([63.162.81.179]:40876 "EHLO grunt.slaphack.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751052AbWHIPsi (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2006 11:48:38 -0400 Message-ID: <44DA03D1.1000100@slaphack.com> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:48:33 -0400 From: David Masover User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Macintosh/20060719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Engelhardt CC: Hans Reiser , Edward Shishkin , Matthias Andree , ric@emc.com, Alan Cox , Adrian Ulrich , "Horst H. von Brand" , bernd-schubert@gmx.de, reiserfs-list@namesys.com, jbglaw@lug-owl.de, clay.barnes@gmail.com, rudy@edsons.demon.nl, ipso@snappymail.ca, lkml@lpbproductions.com, jeff@garzik.org, tytso@mit.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion References: <200607312314.37863.bernd-schubert@gmx.de> <200608011428.k71ESIuv007094@laptop13.inf.utfsm.cl> <20060801165234.9448cb6f.reiser4@blinkenlights.ch> <1154446189.15540.43.camel@localhost.localdomain> <44CF9BAD.5020003@emc.com> <44CF3DE0.3010501@namesys.com> <20060803140344.GC7431@merlin.emma.line.org> <44D219F9.9080404@namesys.com> <44D231DF.1080804@namesys.com> <44D37E1B.1040109@namesys.com> <44D3ECB5.1060106@namesys.com> <44D66ADD.6020007@namesys.com> <44D99F96.4090804@namesys.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1045 Lines: 22 Jan Engelhardt wrote: >>> Yes, it looks like a business of node plugin, but AFAIK, you >>> objected against such checks: >> Did I really? Well, I think that allowing users to choose whether to >> checksum or not is a reasonable thing to allow them. I personally would >> skip the checksum on my computer, but others.... >> >> It could be a useful mkfs option.... > > It should preferably a runtime tunable variable, at best even > per-superblock and (overriding the sb setting), per-file. Sounds almost exactly like a plugin. And yes, that would be the way to do it, especially considering some files will already have internal consistency checking -- just as we should allow direct disk IO to some files (no journaling) when the files in question are databases that do their own journaling. - 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/