Re: reiser4 plugins

From: David Masover
Date: Thu Jun 23 2005 - 09:12:38 EST

Hash: SHA1

Hans Reiser wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>We have to maintain said ugly code for decades.
> No you don't, I do.
>>>filesystem, but if so, it will have to do it much more slowly. Take the
>>>good ideas -- things like plugins -- and make them at least look like
>>>incremental updates to the current VFS, and make them available to all
>>So, Reiser4 may eventually take over VFS and be the only Linux
>>This is how all Linux development is done.
>>The code evolves over time.
>>You have just described the path ReiserFS needs to take, in order to
>>get this stuff into the kernel, in fact.
> You missed his point. He is saying ext3 code should migrate towards
> becoming reiser4 plugins, and reiser4 should be merged now so that the
> migration can get started.

Sort of.

I think ext3 would be nice as a reiser4 plugin. Not everyone will want
to reformat at once, but as the reiser4 code matures and proves itself
(even more than it already has), the ext3 people may find themselves
wanting some of the more generic optimizations.

But, I don't think that will realistically happen at all.

Instead, what will probably happen is that once Reiser4 is in the
mainstream kernel, it will become more popular and noticable. Other
FSes will take note. ext3 people may decide they want
file-as-directory, and vfat people may decide they want cryptocompress,
and so on. In order to do this, they can work with Namesys to port
whatever feature they need at the time to the standard VFS.

Eventually, with all the features ported, we end up with a situation
where there may be no meaningful difference between a filesystem and a
low-level reiser4 plugin.

At that point, we both win. ext3 will effectively be reiser4 plugins,
and reiser4 will replace VFS, but incrementally and sanely, without
breaking old filesystems or depriving them of features. This is indeed
the way to evolve the code slowly over time.

This way also has the advantage of avoiding yet another, even more
vicious flamefest if all the reiser4 functionality had to be ported to
VFS all at once. Can any of you honestly say that you would be more
willing to accept a brand-new, relatively unproven filesystem with tons
of changes to the VFS than without?

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at