Just clarify a few things. Don't you hate rereading a long work you wrote? (oh, you're supposed to do that *before* you press send?). On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 03:45:28AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > > I'm announcing "fsblock" now because it is quite intrusive and so I'd > like to get some thoughts about significantly changing this core part > of the kernel. > > fsblock is a rewrite of the "buffer layer" (ding dong the witch is > dead), which I have been working on, on and off and is now at the stage > where some of the basics are working-ish. This email is going to be > long... > > Firstly, what is the buffer layer? The buffer layer isn't really a > buffer layer as in the buffer cache of unix: the block device cache > is unified with the pagecache (in terms of the pagecache, a blkdev > file is just like any other, but with a 1:1 mapping between offset > and block). I mean, in Linux, the block device cache is unified. UNIX I believe did all its caching in a buffer cache, below the filesystem. > - Large block support. I can mount and run an 8K block size minix3 fs on > my 4K page system and it didn't require anything special in the fs. We Oh, and I don't have a Linux mkfs that makes minixv3 filesystems. I had an image kindly made for me because I don't use minix. If you want to test large block support, I won't email it to you though: you can just convert ext2 or ext3 to fsblock ;) - 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
