From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760808AbYDNIqU (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Apr 2008 04:46:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757502AbYDNIqI (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Apr 2008 04:46:08 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:41259 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757277AbYDNIqG (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Apr 2008 04:46:06 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 01:44:45 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Xavier Bestel Cc: Alan Cox , David Woodhouse , Miklos Szeredi , hch@infradead.org, me@bobcopeland.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] OMFS filesystem version 3 Message-Id: <20080414014445.5b4a7b22.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1208161859.3596.75.camel@skunk.anacadf.mentorg.com> References: <1208041121-26787-1-git-send-email-me@bobcopeland.com> <20080412170304.54f139e2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080413033344.GA27494@hash.localnet> <20080412205544.5e12a7d4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080413080130.GA9622@infradead.org> <20080413012001.8d7967f4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080413082815.GA20108@infradead.org> <1208121358.2700.4.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080413154459.4b2f125d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080413234920.63711ca7@core> <20080413161014.cb06964c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1208161859.3596.75.camel@skunk.anacadf.mentorg.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:30:59 +0200 Xavier Bestel wrote: > On Sun, 2008-04-13 at 16:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > I appear to be the only one who is looking at the whole picture. > > > > Merging a new filesystem has costs - I don't need to enumerate them. Do > > the benefits of OMFS exceed them? > > Eh you, corporate linux developer, please don't discriminate what's > going in the kernel just because of extra cost. By "cost" I refer to extra developer time spent on maintaining the filesystem. The most recent example is the write_begin/write_end changes which took a lot of Nick's time and rather a lot of mine also. I get to see these costs. I seek to minimise them. > Let linux continue to be > "by the people, for the people" if you see what I mean. "the people" here are those who work on the kernel. We want our time to be spent as effectively as possible. Sorry if that sounds corporate.