On December 4, 2001 03:09 am, Donald Becker wrote:
> To bring this branch back on point: we should distinguish between
> design for an arbitrary and unpredictable goal (e.g. 128 way SMP)
> vs. putting some design into things that we are supposed to already
> understan
> [...]
> a VFS layer that doesn't require the kernel to know a priori all of
> the filesystem types that might be loaded
Right, there's a consensus that the fs includes have to fixed and that it
should be in 2.5.lownum. The precise plan isn't fully evolved yet ;)
See fsdevel for the thread, 3-4 months ago. IIRC, the favored idea (Linus's)
was to make the generic struct inode part of the fs-specific inode instead of
the other way around, which resolves the question of how the compiler
calculates the size/layout of an inode.
This is going to be a pervasive change that someone has to do all in one
day, so it remains to be seen when/if that is actually going to happen.
It's also going to break every out-of-tree filesystem.
-- Daniel - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 07 2001 - 21:00:23 EST