Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sunday 19 October 2008 22:09, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: >> > - Buffer operations need to be adapted to work with page cache and >> > bio instead of userspace synchronous Posix IO. >> >> For now, I can't image what we want... BTW, do we support the blocksize >> smaller than PAGE_CACHE_SIZE? > > Of course, and that will require some extra fiddling with the page cache > access code. > > By coincidence, Tux3 University has lately been concentrating on exactly > the code we will be working with here.
Oh, is it talking about design too? Can I join to? >> > - Spinlocks for VFS ops >> >> Um.. what does this mean? > > Spinlocks are needed all over the place to serialize VFs operations > that would otherwise be racy with respect to Tux3 data structures. Yes, e.g. the spinlock/mutex for btree? I thought it may be replacements of inode->i_mutex or something. >> In future, how are we going to use the userland? I worry we are bothered >> to sync userland <-> kernel... > > This gives us a very good start on a userspace based fsck and repair > tool. There is no reason why we cannot include full access to the Tux3 > filesystem from our repair/analysis tool. > > I don't know if the fuse interface will have long term value, but it > certainly has value now and uses largely the same code we need for > userspace support tools, so it will not be much additional work to > continue to support it. I see. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Tux3 mailing list [email protected] http://tux3.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tux3
