Re: [RFC PATCH 08/20] famfs: Add famfs_internal.h

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 24/02/27 10:28AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:35:17 -0600
> John Groves <John@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On 24/02/26 12:48PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 11:41:52 -0600
> > > John Groves <John@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > Add the famfs_internal.h include file. This contains internal data
> > > > structures such as the per-file metadata structure (famfs_file_meta)
> > > > and extent formats.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: John Groves <john@xxxxxxxxxx>  
> > > Hi John,
> > > 
> > > Build this up as you add the definitions in later patches.
> > > 
> > > Separate header patches just make people jump back and forth when trying
> > > to review.  Obviously more work to build this stuff up cleanly but
> > > it's worth doing to save review time.
> > >   
> > 
> > Ohhhhkaaaaay. I think you're right, just not looking forward to
> > all that rebasing.
> 
> :)  Patch mangling is half the fun of upstream development :)
> 
> > 
> > > Generally I'd plumb up Kconfig and Makefile a the beginning as it means
> > > that the set is bisectable and we can check the logic of building each stage.
> > > That is harder to do but tends to bring benefits in forcing clear step
> > > wise approach on a patch set. Feel free to ignore this one though as it
> > > can slow things down.  
> > 
> > I'm not sure that's practical. A file system needs a bunch of different
> > kinds of operations
> > - super_operations
> > - fs_context_operations
> > - inode_operations
> > - file_operations
> > - dax holder_operations, iomap_ops
> > - etc.
> > 
> > Will think about the dependency graph of these entities, but I'm not sure
> > it's tractable...
> 
> Sure.  There's a difference though between doing something useful (or
> even successfully loading) and being able to build it at intermediate steps.
> I'm only looking for buildability.
> 
> If not possible, even with a few stubs, empty ops structures etc
> then fair enough.
> 
> Jonathan

I'm through at least the first stage of grief on this. By the time we're
through this I'll be able to reconstitute the whole bloody thing from memory,
backwards :D

John





[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux