From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750950AbcFATbL (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:31:11 -0400 Received: from lists.s-osg.org ([54.187.51.154]:33555 "EHLO lists.s-osg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750765AbcFATbJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:31:09 -0400 Message-ID: <574F37F8.400@osg.samsung.com> Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 20:31:04 +0100 From: Luis de Bethencourt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: Al Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] befs: remove unused endian functions References: <1464701277-29962-1-git-send-email-luisbg@osg.samsung.com> <20160531205455.GE14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <574DFB17.5080904@osg.samsung.com> <20160601122030.73fa60cb35a8bb4a306835bb@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20160601122030.73fa60cb35a8bb4a306835bb@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/06/16 20:20, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 31 May 2016 21:59:03 +0100 Luis de Bethencourt wrote: > >> On 31/05/16 21:54, Al Viro wrote: >>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 02:27:57PM +0100, Luis de Bethencourt wrote: >>>> Remove endianness conversion functions that are declared but never used. >>> >>> Well... As long as it stays read-only - sure, you don't need to convert >>> anything to on-disk types. > > I think it would be best to leave the code as-is. The compiler will > remove it all so there's a very small amount of compile-time cost. We > could just comment the code out but then they would rot over time, > Hi Andew, Sorry for submitting a patch that got nacked. I have two other in befs, but they are small and trivial. >> >> Hello, >> >> While reading the BeFS book "Practical Filesystems" I have gotten really >> interested in this and it's why I am reading/learning the Linux >> implementation. >> >> The idea of adding write support has crossed my mind, but I wanted to know >> if you would be interested in this before I start looking into it. Are you? >> >> It would take some time and there are other things to clean in the befs code >> first though. > > It could be a fun starter project but I have to say, befs is not a very > valuable place in which to spend your time nor is befs the best place > in which to develop familiarity. A more modest project within a more > mainstream part of the kernel would be a better investment. > That is a good point. One of the reasons I've been reading the Linux implementation of befs is because it is unmaintained. I thought I could help, but it also means there isn't huge interest for more support. Do you have any suggestions of more modest projects within other file systems? Something that would be a better time investment. Thanks for the help, Luis