From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joel Becker Date: Fri Dec 7 01:28:19 2007 Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC] to make files of ocfs2 under sysfs canonical In-Reply-To: <91b13c310712062321u7ffe7f9dqbe228d6995ce79e@mail.gmail.com> References: <4758ca1d.11588c0a.7668.ffff9173@mx.google.com> <20071207051224.GA29246@tasint.org> <91b13c310712062321u7ffe7f9dqbe228d6995ce79e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20071207092807.GA29158@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 03:21:20PM +0800, rae l wrote: > On Dec 7, 2007 1:12 PM, Joel Becker wrote: > > o2cb is, in theory, independent of the filesystem. Thus, it doesn't > > necessarily belong under /sys/fs. > I agree it's independent, but /sys/oc2b just don't conform the uniform > of the linux kernel sysfs usage. By your measure. By others, it does. In fact, we asked around before we put it there. > > The bigger problem is that there are tools expecting /sys/o2cb to be > > there. We can't just drop it. > Do you mean the ocfs2-tools? We could also change it. Or any other tools? I mean ocfs2-tools. We have to deal with existing installations, not just new tools. > The kernel community doesn't promise a stable kernel API, so does the sysfs, > Except If it would break many userspace tools, we should consider with > caution or keep the binary compatibility, sysfs is a userspace ABI. The kernel *does* try to keep userspace ABI stable or backwards compatible. Joel -- "What do you take me for, an idiot?" - General Charles de Gaulle, when a journalist asked him if he was happy. Joel Becker Principal Software Developer Oracle E-mail: joel.becker@oracle.com Phone: (650) 506-8127