On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 03:31:21PM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> > This is a patch series for v0.9 of the Ceph distributed file system
> > client (against v2.6.30).
> >
> > Greg, the first patch in the series creates an fs/staging/ directory.
> > This is analogous to drivers/staging/ (not built by allyesconfig,
> > modpost will mark the module with 'staging', etc.), except you can
> > find it under the File Systems section (and it doesn't get hidden
> > along with drivers/ on UML).
> >
> > If that looks reasonable, I would love to see this go into the staging
> > tree. The remaining patches add Ceph at fs/staging/ceph.
>
> No, please put "staging" filesystems at drivers/staging/ where the other
> filesystems that are in "staging" shape are.
>
> This is due to some core changes needed to mark such modules as
> "TAINT_CRAP", and to make it obvious who is to blame for such crap :)
Ah, okay. I thought this modpost.c change would be enough to accomplish
that, but I didn't look too closely:
@@ -1721,8 +1721,10 @@ static void add_header(struct buffer *b, struct
module *mod)
void add_staging_flag(struct buffer *b, const char *name)
{
static const char *staging_dir = "drivers/staging";
+ static const char *fsstaging_dir = "fs/staging";
- if (strncmp(staging_dir, name, strlen(staging_dir)) == 0)
+ if (strncmp(staging_dir, name, strlen(staging_dir)) == 0 ||
+ strncmp(fsstaging_dir, name, strlen(fsstaging_dir)) == 0)
buf_printf(b, "\nMODULE_INFO(staging, \"Y\");\n");
}
Are the core changes onerous? If you don't object in principle, it would
be nice if staging file systems were easier to find.
sage
--
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
