Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Apr 2008 13:29:29 -0700 (PDT) | From | david@lang ... | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/7] OMFS filesystem version 3 |
| |
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Monday 14 April 2008, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 09:16:39AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: >>> I think the exceed them quite easily. The costs are almost nil, while >>> merging this provides another nice example fs (and one much easier to >>> follow than ext*) for hardware that does have a few users and will no >>> doubt get many more >>> >>> I wasn't aware Linus had introduced a new rule required 500 people sign >>> up to use a feature before it gets added ? >> >> I'm also very surprised by this, especially as it seems to be applied >> very selectively. This filesystems is an almost 0 maintainance burden >> unlike a lot of really crappy driver we're shoving in constantly. > > Thanks to Bob Copeland for taking the time to submit this for mainline. > Please don't mistake the resulting debate as a sign we don't appreciate the > effort of making it available and getting it reviewed.
seconded.
> Unlike all the device drivers we don't want floating around out of the tree, > filesystem authors do have a choice between FUSE and being in-kernel. Since > OMFS has been maintained out of tree since 2.6.12 or so, Bob probably has a > very good idea of how much time he has needed to spend updating things for > each release.
switching to FUSE also has a cost for users, namely that they need to have FUSE setup (and the various interactions and deadlocks that can happen with a userspace filesystem, such as swapping to it)
as a user I would prefer to see filesystems (even ones I don't expect to uer) be all treated the same way, not have to figure out that to use this list of filesystems I configure them in the kernel, and to use that list of filesystem I have to run FUSE.
for testing, or for things that aren't really filesystems (views into version control systems, tarballs, etc) FUSE is a good match.
but for real filesystems it's a poor second.
David Lang
| |