On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 09:51:07AM -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote: > > If the OHSM team implements a similar ioctl for ext2 and ext3 and > submits them for mainline at some point, do they have a chance of > being accepted or are ext2 and ext3 feature frozen? It seems unlikely it would be accepted. If the patch could be done in a way that seriously minimized the chances of destablizing the code, maybe --- but consider also that the OHSM design is a pretty terrible hack. I'm not at all conviced they will be able to stablize it for production use, and a scheme that involves using dmapi across multiple block devices. Note that they apparently need to make other changes to the core filesystem code besides just the ioctl --- to the block allocation code, at the very least. The right answer is really to use a stackable filesystem, and to use separate filesystems for each different tier, and then build on top of unionfs to give it its policy support. I suspect that OHSM will be a cute student project, but it won't become anything serious given its architecture/design, unfortunately. - Ted -- 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
