Re: linux-next: Tree for December 18 (fscache)

[David Howells]

Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Should include/linux/buffer_head.h have an empty stub for fsync_super()
> or does fscache even make sense when CONFIG_BLOCK=n?

FS-Cache might.  CacheFiles probably doesn't.

There've been discussions about a separate caching backend to deal with
non-rotating media such as large chunks of battery-backed RAM or flash.
FS-Cache might make sense in such a situation as these could be accessed in
other ways (such as through MTD or even directly).

I'll make CONFIG_CACHEFILES dependent on CONFIG_BLOCK.

David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/