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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
