Re: [PATCH 1/9] exofs: Kbuild, Headers and osd utils

[Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>]

On 04/02/2009 04:13 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> This patch includes osd infrastructure that will be used later by
>> the file system.
>>
>> Also the declarations of constants, on disk structures,
>> and prototypes.
>>
>> And the Kbuild+Kconfig files needed to build the exofs module.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/exofs/Kbuild   |   16 +++++
>>  fs/exofs/Kconfig  |   13 ++++
>>  fs/exofs/common.h |  184 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  fs/exofs/exofs.h  |  127 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  fs/exofs/osd.c    |  153 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  5 files changed, 493 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>  create mode 100644 fs/exofs/Kbuild
>>  create mode 100644 fs/exofs/Kconfig
>>  create mode 100644 fs/exofs/common.h
>>  create mode 100644 fs/exofs/exofs.h
>>  create mode 100644 fs/exofs/osd.c
> 
> After building "osdblk", a block driver using libosd, it is my opinion 
> that all functions inside fs/exofs/osd.c should be moved to libosd.
> 
> I find myself copying most of that file, to use in osdblk.
> 
> 	Jeff
> 

Yes I agree

I have such patches queued on my oo-devel branch that remove
half, and a plan to remove the second half in a more generic
manner.

The problem with those left is that they set policy like the
parameters in the call to osd_finalize_request, but it
might be better to just fold these into osd_execute_*

My long time plan was to implement at first the lowest level
only, then over time when repeated recipes arise add them.
I guess "later" as arrived.

Thanks
Boaz