From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC][ATTEND] Merging the Lustre filesystem Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 02:15:01 -0500 Message-ID: <20110212071501.GA18475@infradead.org> References: <20110202141431.GA4040@granier.hd.free.fr> <20110202145931.GA14967@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , lsf-pc@lists.linuxfoundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas Dilger Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:42024 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751354Ab1BLHPF (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Feb 2011 02:15:05 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:46:51PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > The point is that both the kernel and Lustre have changed enough that kernel patches are no longer needed on the client, and we are working toward removing the kernel patches on the server. At that point it would be possible to merge Lustre as an isolated (though very large) filesystem. Exactly. And that's the reason why it has no business hogging away LSF sessions. It might be fine as a BOF session if you think you have enough people actually doing the work around that otherwise wouldn't be, but it really isn't anything of general interest for all filesystem developers. "talk is cheap, show me the code"