Re: [PATCH 02/14] spufs: fix local store page refcounting

Pekka Enberg
2005-12-06T21:41:40Z

Hi Paul,

On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 08:10 +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> The point is that people making changes to the filesystem interfaces
> will be much more likely to notice and fix stuff that is under fs/
> than code that is buried deep under arch/ somewhere. Filesystems
> should go under fs/ for the sake of long-term maintainability. The
> fact that it's only used on one architecture is irrelevant - you
> simply make sure (with the appropriate Kconfig bits) that it's only
> offered on that architecture.

I think the fact that it is highly architecture specific is relevant. I
have no way of testing spufs changes except on cell, no? And if I am
developing on a cell, I probably will notice it in arch/ all the same.
So I don't quite buy your the maintenace argument.

But as Arnd said, there are no clear rules on what kind of filesystems
should go into fs/ so please do whatever you must.

Pekka