Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S318358AbSHKUhj>; Sun, 11 Aug 2002 16:37:39 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S318361AbSHKUhj>; Sun, 11 Aug 2002 16:37:39 -0400
Received: from thebsh.namesys.com ([212.16.7.65]:27153 "HELO
	thebsh.namesys.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP
	id <S318358AbSHKUhi>; Sun, 11 Aug 2002 16:37:38 -0400
Message-ID: <3D56CBB5.3010905@namesys.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 00:40:21 +0400
From: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020529
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
CC: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
       Hans Reiser <reiser@bitshadow.namesys.com>,
       Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@conectiva.com.br>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BK] [PATCH] reiserfs changeset 7 of 7 to include into 2.4 tree
References: <200208091636.g79GadA9007889@bitshadow.namesys.com> 	<20020809183850.A17407@infradead.org> <1029097261.16421.45.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> <3D56C6A4.5010604@namesys.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1600
Lines: 49

Hans Reiser wrote:

> Alan Cox wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2002-08-09 at 18:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> Are you sure you want to have a new block allocator in the stable 
>>> series
>>> before it has been added to 2.5?
>>>   
>>
>>
>> Thats what I was also wondering. It seems like its an experimental
>> update rather than a bug fix so ought to be 2.5 stuff
>>
>> -
>> 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/
>>
>>
>>  
>>
> The non-default mount options are experimental, and the options to 
> have things revert to old behaviour play it safe just in case.
>
> I understand why all of you are doubtful about it going into 2.4, it 
> is not that you are crazy, but my closeness to the code makes me think 
> it is stable enough that it should go in.  Also remember that we have 
> an extensive test suite, we have been benchmarking variations on this 
> code for months, and I frankly don't think that 2.5 insertion will get 
> it enough testing to be instructive to us.
>
I meant to add that the default mount options are not experimental in my 
view, they are tested and chosen as what works well and is simple/elegant.

-- 
Hans



-
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/