From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933043AbWFZVIs (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:08:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933046AbWFZVIs (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:08:48 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:60867 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933043AbWFZVIr (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:08:47 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:03:55 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Christoph Hellwig , Nick Piggin , Steven Whitehouse , Linus Torvalds , David Teigland , Patrick Caulfield , Kevin Anderson , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: GFS2 and DLM Message-ID: <20060626210355.GA16827@elte.hu> References: <1150805833.3856.1356.camel@quoit.chygwyn.com> <4497EAC6.3050003@yahoo.com.au> <1150807630.3856.1372.camel@quoit.chygwyn.com> <44980064.6040306@yahoo.com.au> <20060623144530.GA32291@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060623144530.GA32291@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamScore: -3.1 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-3.1 required=5.9 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_50 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -3.3 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts 0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.5000] 0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > The part where you needed file_read_actor looks like pretty much a stright > > cut and paste from __generic_file_aio_read, which indicates that you might > > be exporting at the wrong level. > > A definitive NACK to this export. All other filesystems manage to use > the generic file read code so GFS should do so aswell. And there's a > technical reason for not exporting aswell as the generic file read > interface is far too complicated already. GFS is different here mostly due to locking, because one of its strong features is an implementation of pretty strict POSIX semantics in a clustered environment, something that no other Linux FS (that is available in source code) has done so far. (OCFS2 does not do it as strictly - it has a very specific application in mind) so i'd reformulate your request as a request to extend the VFS to unify clustering filesystems - which is a nice cleanup goal but not a merge showstopper to me. > > Not sure about the tty_ export. Would it be better to make a generic > > printfish interface on top of it and also replace the interesting > > dquot.c gymnastics? (I don't know) > > In fact neither gfs nor dquot should use it at all. The xfs quota > code is fine without this nonsense. yeah, the tty_ export is unnecessary and should be fixed. But this seems quite easy to do. Ingo