From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p9RG7HLG104362 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:07:17 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id E2B451FC758 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:07:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id k5JH16Lnfs7GylMA for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:07:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 12:07:11 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: Question w.r.t xfsprogs changes Message-ID: <20111027160711.GB21551@infradead.org> References: <1319664723.1959.90.camel@chandra-lucid.austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1319664723.1959.90.camel@chandra-lucid.austin.ibm.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Chandra Seetharaman Cc: XFS Mailing List On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 04:32:03PM -0500, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > Hello All, > > I am trying to make changes to the xfsprogs to support the patches I > posted last week (and few minutes earlier). > > Looking at the xfsprogs code, I realize that the content of some of the > files(xfs_mount.c, xfs_quota.h, etc.,) are pretty much same as the > kernel files. > > Just wondering if those changes are to be made explicitly or they will > be copied over from the kernel tree at some regular intervals ? IOW, > should I be changing those files (in xfsprogs) and posting them as > patches or have to wait for the sync to happen and then make only the > changes that are specific to user space ? Yes - basically all of the xfs_* files in libxfs/ and include are copies of the kernel code. Unfortunately it's not 1:1 at the moment as there are a few differences: - the userspace code uses a single include instead of the individual includes in kernel space - some files aren't fully used in userspace and the userspace variants miss some functions - if I remember correctly some functions aren't static in the userland version. The latests xfsprogs release contains a major rebase of the code, but if you have enough time to a resync with the code for the Linux 3.2 merge it would help a lot. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs