From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <39580FFF.42AD815D@inet.net.nz> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 14:22:55 +1200 From: Dale Kemp MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Re: IBM to release LVM Technology to the Linux References: <299BF5F5EF5ED31196760008C7D9AE5D03AFCA1F@STLABCEXG022> <3957E4B8.99CC906C@inet.net.nz> <20000627040212.A11246@gruyere.muc.suse.de> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-lvm Errors-To: owner-linux-lvm List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Andi Kleen Cc: Linux LVM > The generic VFS code just never looks into the union,it is certainly > abstractly used. Putting it into the union is just an performance optimization > to make it use one allocation less in critical paths. File systems that > do not want to change the source files are free to use the generic_ip > pointer instead and let it point to a private structure. > > -Andi (who prefers Linux VFS over ``8.3 macro hell'' Sun/BSD derived VFS) Yes, I see its abstractly used I guess OO programmers don't like the whole concept of the union data structure, but for kernel programming, device drivers etc it can make things go a bit quicker, and save space. I hear from Andreas that design work is currently going on for VFS for kernels 2.5/2.6. That's one of those things about Linux if it doesn't exist, or needs improving, it's probably already being worked on - relentless improvement. -- Dale.