[ I haven't gotten to the filesystem pulls yet, and by now won't until
tomorrow, but I'm looking a bit ahead here.. ]
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Mike Marshall <hubcap@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Please consider pulling Orangefs from
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/hubcap/linux.git for-next
I'd love to have comments and ack's from people. From the Cc I'd hope
we have people who have followed this, but there's no indication of
acks etc in the commits, so..
A few quick comments from just skimming the code and the commits:
- the commit messages aren't really helpful. "Orangefs: kernel client
part 4". Yeah, that doesn't really say anything
- the sign-offs are odd (omnibond _and_ clemson.edu?)
- the code doesn't look obviously horrible, but I did notice that
(a) the iovecs are walked manually (eg
pvfs_bufmap_copy_to_user_iovec()). I would really want to see the code
use the iov_iter infrastructure
(b) iovec_iter may be new, but the wait_event() helpers are not,
and the code (eg pvfs2_devreq_writev) is using the really
old-fashioned way to wait for things (with add_wait_queue,
set_current_state, etc etc). I'd *really* want to see the much
simpler-to-read (and less bug-prone) wait_event() models used.
- naming is an odd mix of "orangefs" and "pvfs2", both in the code
and in the filenames.
It would be lovely to get some comments from other people. Al? Anybody
who has been involved with this?
I'd also like to have more of an idea of who expects to maintain this?
I'm assuming that's Mark (and omnibond?), but it would be good to hear
who the users are and what the long-term support is supposed to be. We
have had a tradition of filesystems that don't then get used very
much, and they bit-rot.
Linus
--
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
