From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Zarochentsev Subject: Re: reiser4 plugins Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:55:28 +0400 Message-ID: <200506252255.29208.zam@namesys.com> References: <20050620235458.5b437274.akpm@osdl.org> <42B8B9EE.7020002@namesys.com> <20050621181802.11a792cc.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <20050621181802.11a792cc.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Andrew Morton Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Hans Reiser , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 22 June 2005 05:18, Andrew Morton wrote: > Hans Reiser wrote: > > What is wrong with having an encryption plugin implemented in this > > manner? What is wrong with being able to have some files implemented > > using a compression plugin, and others in the same filesystem not. > > > > What is wrong with having one file in the FS use a write only plugin, in > > which the encrypion key is changed with every append in a forward but > > not backward computable manner, and in order to read a file you must > > either have a key that is stored on another computer or be reading what > > was written after the moment of cracking root? > > > > What is wrong with having a set of critical data files use a CRC > > checking file plugin? > > I think the concern here is that this is implemented at the wrong level. > In Linux, a filesystem is some dumb thing which implements > address_space_operations, filesystem_operations, etc. > It is not so already. XFS, FUSE, network fs are not of that type. Thanks, Alex.