Re: [PATCH 00/44 take 2] [UBI] Unsorted Block Images

[Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@infradead.org>]

On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 10:50 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I think this is the wrong approach.  For one thing the unit terms is
> rather foregin in Linux

I would rather disagree. Subjective. Unit is a generic word, just like
subsystem. Unit-tests for example is a widespread word it refer to
internal units of a big system.

> , and second this one header file "unit" is
> definitly too much.

It is .c + .h.

Why definitely, where is the definition? I appreciate your opinion, but
do not want any endless discussion about "how the life has to go",
though.

>   Normally you'd have as little as possible and at
> most four:
> 
>  (1) internal definitions of the driver
>  (2) external kernel interface of the driver if nessecary
>  (3) user interface of the driver if nessecary
>  (4) ondisk structure if nessecary

Where does this rather restrictive model come from? What does it mean in
practice for UBI? Please, be more specific.

> Also please make sure you submit patches at this driver level.  You really
> want one git commit per driver that is totally self-contained.  If nessecary
> you'd split this into multiple patches if a single one would be bigger then
> the message size limit.

Please, refine what does this exactly mean. I do not see how I should
have sent it, sorry. OK, I've separated external headers, JFFS2 support,
build stuff. What next?

And I sent it just for review, as you requested, I assumed that for the
pull we have git, and I specified the URL.

Thanks,
Artem.

-- 
Best regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)