From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:54:13 -0400
Message-ID: <448ADD15.3040109@garzik.org>
References: <20060609091327.GA3679@infradead.org>
	<20060609030759.48cd17a0.akpm@osdl.org>
	<44899653.1020007@garzik.org>
	<20060609095620.22326f9d.akpm@osdl.org> <4489AAD9.80806@garzik.org>
	<20060609103543.52c00c62.akpm@osdl.org>
	<4489B452.4050100@garzik.org> <4489B719.2070707@garzik.org>
	<170fa0d20606091127h735531d1s6df27d5721a54b80@mail.gmail.com>
	<20060610134946.GC11634@stusta.de>
	<20060610135122.GA9039@infradead.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
Return-path: <ext2-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060610135122.GA9039@infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ext2-devel>,
	<mailto:ext2-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=ext2-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:ext2-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ext2-devel>,
	<mailto:ext2-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ext2-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
Errors-To: ext2-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 03:49:46PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>>> And no real-world near-term progress is made for production users with
>>> modern requirements. What you're advocating breeds instability in the
>>> near-term.
>> There's also the old-fashioned "no regressions" requirement.
>>
>> You are trading near-term instability for the few users with "modern 
>> requirements" against possible regressions for a large userbase.
> 
> Alex mentioned a few times that the extents code just adds three if.
> I'm pretty sure that will not give you any regressions in the existing
> codebase.  Can we concentrate on the more useful discussion topics now?

Alex is off by an order of magnitude.  I've re-read the 13-patch series, 
and this is the result of the review:

There are _five_ "if (new) .. else .." constructs added in JBD alone.

Three added in extent map support.

Twenty-seven (27) such constructs in 48-bit physical block support.

Two more in 48-bit ACL support.

And finally, the superblock changes don't add any branches, like the 
other code does, but it does double the endian conversion work that 
-every- user must do, even if they don't use 48bit at all.

	Jeff