Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754910Ab2B0TJY (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:09:24 -0500 Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:43460 "EHLO test.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754528Ab2B0TJW (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:09:22 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:09:16 -0500 From: "Ted Ts'o" To: Andreas Dilger Cc: David Howells , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk" , "valerie.aurora@gmail.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jan Kara , "linux-ext4@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 66/73] ext2: Split ext2_add_entry() from ext2_add_link() [ver #2] Message-ID: <20120227190916.GH1651@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ted Ts'o , Andreas Dilger , David Howells , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk" , "valerie.aurora@gmail.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jan Kara , "linux-ext4@kernel.org" References: <20120221175721.25235.8901.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20120221180546.25235.50961.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20120227000428.GA8044@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on test.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1235 Lines: 25 On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 08:30:34PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > I'd suggest folding this in with the following patch (67/73). It's > > not clear from this patch why renaming ext2_add_link to > > ext2_add_entry() makes sense and then adding a new ext2_add_link() > > which calls ext_add_entry(). It doesn't seem to clarify much.... > > Also, why is this being done in ext2, when it should only be done in ext4? I believe Val used ext2 as a proof-of-concept, because the codebase was stable (and Union Mounts has been in the oven a loooong time, so that was probably a good choice). I agree that if union mounts is finally going to make it upstream, this would be a good time to support implemented for ext4, and to get the support into e2fsprogs. BTW, one thing that I think would be a good thing to do while we're making this change is to mask off the low 4 bits when looking at the filetype field so eventually we can use the high 4 bits for some future extension. - Ted -- 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/