* Re: YAFFS in the kernel tree?
From: David Woodhouse @ 2008-05-28 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Charles Manning; +Cc: linux-embedded-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
In-Reply-To: <200805290859.54396.manningc2-jEEI2ySEPisjAXWc8ALWsQ@public.gmane.org>
On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 08:59 +1200, Charles Manning wrote:
> I'm the author of YAFFS. This is not in the kernel tree, but is fairly easy to
> integrate by just pulling a tarball and running patch-in script.
>
> I am curious as to whether people consider the current mechanism "good enough"
> or whether it is worth the effort trying to get YAFFS into the kernel tree.
I've never paid close attention to YAFFS, and part of the reason for
that is that it's never been considered good enough to be merged into
the kernel tree. If it isn't even being posted for _review_, then it
might as well not exist.
There's a lot more to code review than the cosmetics of 'coding style'.
I would definitely encourage you to get the code into a shape where we
can consider merging it.
--
dwmw2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: YAFFS in the kernel tree?
From: Charles Manning @ 2008-05-28 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: linux-embedded-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805281711370.3803-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org>
On Thursday 29 May 2008 09:12:40 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Thu, 29 May 2008, Charles Manning wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm the author of YAFFS. This is not in the kernel tree, but is fairly
> > easy to integrate by just pulling a tarball and running patch-in script.
> >
> > I am curious as to whether people consider the current mechanism "good
> > enough" or whether it is worth the effort trying to get YAFFS into the
> > kernel tree.
> >
> > Pros I can see:
> > * In tree means better testing (maybe).
> > * Keeping current with kernel API changes.
> >
> > Cons:
> > * More effort for YAFFS maintainers (me mostly).
> > * Effort getting code into kernel coding style (unless I can get a waiver
> > on this).
> >
> > Thoughts??
>
> perhaps a dumb question, but does this include YAFFS2 as well?
>
> p.s. and, no, you don't get a pass on coding style, but others will
> almost certainly help you out there. :-)
That would only be yaffs2 which has yaffs1 backward compatibility built in.
-- CHarles
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: YAFFS in the kernel tree?
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2008-05-28 21:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Charles Manning; +Cc: linux-embedded-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
In-Reply-To: <200805290859.54396.manningc2-jEEI2ySEPisjAXWc8ALWsQ@public.gmane.org>
On Thu, 29 May 2008, Charles Manning wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm the author of YAFFS. This is not in the kernel tree, but is fairly easy to
> integrate by just pulling a tarball and running patch-in script.
>
> I am curious as to whether people consider the current mechanism "good enough"
> or whether it is worth the effort trying to get YAFFS into the kernel tree.
>
> Pros I can see:
> * In tree means better testing (maybe).
> * Keeping current with kernel API changes.
>
> Cons:
> * More effort for YAFFS maintainers (me mostly).
> * Effort getting code into kernel coding style (unless I can get a waiver on
> this).
>
> Thoughts??
perhaps a dumb question, but does this include YAFFS2 as well?
rday
p.s. and, no, you don't get a pass on coding style, but others will
almost certainly help you out there. :-)
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
Have classroom, will lecture.
http://crashcourse.ca Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
========================================================================
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply
* YAFFS in the kernel tree?
From: Charles Manning @ 2008-05-28 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-embedded-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
Hi
I'm the author of YAFFS. This is not in the kernel tree, but is fairly easy to
integrate by just pulling a tarball and running patch-in script.
I am curious as to whether people consider the current mechanism "good enough"
or whether it is worth the effort trying to get YAFFS into the kernel tree.
Pros I can see:
* In tree means better testing (maybe).
* Keeping current with kernel API changes.
Cons:
* More effort for YAFFS maintainers (me mostly).
* Effort getting code into kernel coding style (unless I can get a waiver on
this).
Thoughts??
-- CHarles
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Fwd: Some embedded topics
From: Joe MacDonald @ 2008-05-28 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marco Stornelli; +Cc: linux-embedded-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
In-Reply-To: <483D7355.5050803-5RgZt0ZUL+KonA0d6jMUrA@public.gmane.org>
2008/5/28 Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli-5RgZt0ZUL+KonA0d6jMUrA@public.gmane.org>:
> Joe MacDonald ha scritto:
>>
>> Resending to the whole list since the last time it looks like gmail
>> had decided I wanted to send HTML.
[...]
>> That, and pramfs seems to be largely untouched these days, but since I
>> haven't used it recently, I don't know if the lack of activity is due
>> to neglect or stability.
>>
>
> There's a MontaVista patent on PRAMFS and I think that most of times when a
> company hears this thing it skips quickly this solution. Sometimes ago I
> sent a porting to 2.6.24, but I didn't receive any response.
Really? I had been signed up for the SF.net mailing lists for a while
now and didn't see it come through, but I might've missed it (the list
does appear to have degenerated to a spam target these days). I was
interested in pramfs a while back.
I don't know if Steve Longerbeam is on the list here or not, but I had
been talking to him ... maybe a year and a half ago now? Maybe more
than that. Anyway, when I was he'd said that he simply hadn't had the
time to keep working on it lately and he didn't think there was all
that much interest in it anymore anyway (IIRC). If you had an
interest in doing some forward ports you might try pinging him again
or starting up the discussion on the mailing list and see who else
might be doing (or waitng for someone to do) the same thing.
--
-Joe.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply
page: | prev (newer) | latest
- recent:[subjects (threaded)|topics (new)|topics (active)]
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox