On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 10:33:23AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 07:59:44AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > I'll possibly omit the perform_write stuff in the first -mm merge, so
> > that we can get the basics reviewed and working, and exercise the
> > write_begin/write_end paths well first.
> 
> I agree.  One thing that should be done for the merge is getting rid
> of ->prepare_write and ->commit_write.  Historic data show that if 
> we start a partial transition it will take ages to finish it.  In addition
> to that the backwards compatibility code in this case is rather big and
> very ugly, and we'd be better off without it.

I've tried to go through and convert most of the easier ones, and there
are only a handful of remainders, many of which seem pretty straightforward
and I'll probably end up doing most of them.
 
Reiserfs I think is the biggest one left out, and I hope the maintainers
will help with that.


What about supporting out-of-tree code? Should we provide the backwards
compatibility for a few releases? The good thing about it is that it will
run noticably slower (but deadlock free!), so if anyone cares, they will
have incentive to update :)

OTOH, I agree the compat code is big and ugly, and the sooner it goes the
happier I will be! (not being involved in any out of tree filesystems).

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to