reiser4 for 2.6.33?

reiser4 for 2.6.33?

[Christian Kujau]

It's autumn[0] already and even with 2.6.32 not quite ready yet, let me 
be the one asking the inevitable question:
 What are the plans for reiser4 being included in 2.6.33? The 
diffstat for the 2.6.31 patch looks rather promising, at least to me:

$ diffstat reiser4-for-2.6.31.patch | grep -v fs/reiser4
 Documentation/Changes                         |   12 
 Documentation/filesystems/reiser4.txt         |   75 
 fs/Kconfig                                    |    1 
 fs/Makefile                                   |    1 
 fs/fs-writeback.c                             |    5 
 include/linux/fs.h                            |    3 
 include/linux/mm.h                            |    1 
 mm/filemap.c                                  |    3 
 mm/page-writeback.c                           |   26 
 170 files changed, 77581 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Or maybe it can find a place in -staging if there are still strong 
objections against a general inclusion?

Thanks,
Christian.

[0] http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&m=124904274311847&w=2
-- 
BOFH excuse #70:

nesting roaches shorted out the ether cable

Re: reiser4 for 2.6.33?

[Edward Shishkin]

As I told already for reiser4 inclusion we need the following:

(a) plugin design document;
(b) full description of what is going on in respond to memory
    pressure notifications;

The (a) is not yet ready and I don't have a time to explain
personally to everyone why the plugin stuff is not crappy. It will
be posted in a magazine with proper background, because all
Namesys projects traditionally have academic sources. So wait...

Actually there is no hurry. Taking into account common situation
with file systems, I am not afraid that reiser4 will get obsolete.

Thanks,
Edward.

Christian Kujau wrote:
> It's autumn[0] already and even with 2.6.32 not quite ready yet, let me 
> be the one asking the inevitable question:
>  What are the plans for reiser4 being included in 2.6.33? The 
> diffstat for the 2.6.31 patch looks rather promising, at least to me:
>
> $ diffstat reiser4-for-2.6.31.patch | grep -v fs/reiser4
>  Documentation/Changes                         |   12 
>  Documentation/filesystems/reiser4.txt         |   75 
>  fs/Kconfig                                    |    1 
>  fs/Makefile                                   |    1 
>  fs/fs-writeback.c                             |    5 
>  include/linux/fs.h                            |    3 
>  include/linux/mm.h                            |    1 
>  mm/filemap.c                                  |    3 
>  mm/page-writeback.c                           |   26 
>  170 files changed, 77581 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Or maybe it can find a place in -staging if there are still strong 
> objections against a general inclusion?
>
> Thanks,
> Christian.
>
> [0] http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&m=124904274311847&w=2
>   

Re: reiser4 for 2.6.33?

[Christian Kujau]

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 at 14:50, Edward Shishkin wrote:
> (a) plugin design document;
> (b) full description of what is going on in respond to memory
>    pressure notifications;
> 
> The (a) is not yet ready and I don't have a time to explain
> personally to everyone why the plugin stuff is not crappy.

Is this still a must-have? I.e. are there still strong objections against 
the plugin design? And even if so, most of this happens in fs/reiser4 
anyway I suppose, so the "evil" plugins are well contained :)

As for (b), can't this be documented at a later point as well? 

What about the technical issues, mentioned in the latest TODO list[0] 
earlier this year? Are there any real show-stoppers left?
Andrew (Cc'ed) had this in -mm for a longer time now, maybe he can
comment (once again) what's left to do from his POV?

Thanks,
Christian.

[0] http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&m=124069989217533&w=2
-- 
BOFH excuse #323:

Your processor has processed too many instructions.  Turn it off immediately, do not type any commands!!

Re: reiser4 for 2.6.33?

[drwowe]

Edward Shishkin-2 wrote:
> 
> Actually there is no hurry. Taking into account common situation
> with file systems, I am not afraid that reiser4 will get obsolete.
> 

This is a very interesting comment.
Can you explain what you mean?
-- 
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/reiser4-for-2.6.33--tp26398958p26619549.html
Sent from the ReiserFS - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.