public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Phillip Susi <psusi@cfl.rr.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GFS2 Filesystem [0/16]
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 12:18:31 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <440485E7.4090702@cfl.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060224213553.GA8817@infradead.org>

I'm a bit confused.  Why exactly is this unacceptable, and what exactly 
do you propose instead?  Having an entirely separate mount point that is 
sort of parallel to the main one, but with extra metadata exposed?  So 
instead of /path/to/foo/.gfs2_admin/metafile you'd prefer having a 
separate mount point like /proc/fs/gfs/path/to/foo/metafile?


Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>  b) The .gfs2_admin directory exposes the internal files that GFS uses
>>     to store various bits of file system related information. This means
>>     that we've been able to remove virtually all the ioctl() calls from
>>     GFS2. There is one ioctl() call left which relates to
>>     getting/setting GFS2 specific flags on files. The various GFS2 tools
>>     will be updated in due course to use this new interface.
> 
> Without even looking at the code a strong NACK here.  This is polluting
> the namespace which is not acceptable.  Please implement a second
> filesystem type gfsmeta to do this kind of admin work.  Search for ext2meta
> which did something similar.  Or use a completely different approach,
> I'd need to look at the actual functionality provided to give a better
> advice, but currently I'm lacking the time for that.
> 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-02-28 17:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-02-24 14:48 GFS2 Filesystem [0/16] Steven Whitehouse
2006-02-24 21:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-02-27  9:03   ` Steven Whitehouse
2006-02-28 17:18   ` Phillip Susi [this message]
2006-03-02 10:12     ` Steven Whitehouse
2006-03-02 10:36       ` Al Viro
2006-02-24 21:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-02-24 23:52 ` Andrew Morton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=440485E7.4090702@cfl.rr.com \
    --to=psusi@cfl.rr.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=swhiteho@redhat.com \
    --cc=teigland@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox