Jeff Mahoney wrote: > Hans Reiser wrote: > > >Jeff Mahoney wrote: > > >>Hans Reiser wrote: > >> > >>>I don't understand your patch and cannot support it as it is written. > >>>Perhaps you can call me and explain it on the phone. > >> > >>I seriously can't tell if you're deliberately trying to be difficult or > >>not. It's a simple "replace / with ! before sending the name to procfs." > >> > >>Reiserfs requests that a procfs directory called > >>/proc/fs/reiserfs/<blockdev> be created. Some block devices contain > >>slashes, so with cciss/c123 it attempts to create a directory called > >>/proc/fs/reiserfs/cciss/c123, but cciss/ doesn't exist, shouldn't, and > >>never will. > > >Why not check to see if it does not exist, and create it if not, as > >needed, and skip the !'s....? > > > 1) Because then the behavior of /proc/fs/reiserfs/ would be > inconsistent. Devices that contain slashes end up being one level deeper > than other devices, which is silly and a userspace visible change.
And you think translating / to ! is less work for user space? > Tools > that wish to parse the information would then need added complexity to > traverse into the next level to reach that information. > > 2) The block-device-as-path-name-component behavior is already defined > by sysfs (/sys/block), and it should be consistent. Translate that as, "I won't recompile my brain no matter what you do to make me." You blindly copied how someone else in a hurry did it without a thought to whether it was done right, and now you don't want to change it. You should have asked me about it before coding it. Replace block-device-as-path-name-component with block-device-as-path-name-suffix, and everything is very consistent. And elegant. Jeff, you are a programmer, not an architect, and when you disregard architects we end up with things like the performance disaster that is V3 acls. Replacing / with ! is hideous. Someone added a nifty elegance to block device naming, and you are desecrating it. Hans
