On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
> [..] IMNSHO reiserfs in the official tree right now is the worst
>thing one can do to VFS. [..]
The _only_ VFS change involved in the 2.3.x reiserfs port is this:
- sb->s_op->read_inode(inode);
+
+ /* reiserfs specific hack right here. We don't
+ ** want this to last, and are looking for VFS changes
+ ** that will allow us to get rid of it.
+ ** -- mason@suse.com
+ */
+ if (sb->s_op->read_inode2) {
+ sb->s_op->read_inode2(inode, opaque) ;
+ } else {
+ sb->s_op->read_inode(inode);
+ }
[..]
@@ -694,6 +698,14 @@
*/
struct super_operations {
void (*read_inode) (struct inode *);
+
+ /* reiserfs kludge. reiserfs needs 64 bits of information to
+ ** find an inode. We are using the read_inode2 call to get
+ ** that information. We don't like this, and are waiting on some
+ ** VFS changes for the real solution.
+ ** iget4 calls read_inode2, iff it is defined
+ */
+ void (*read_inode2) (struct inode *, void *) ;
void (*write_inode) (struct inode *);
void (*put_inode) (struct inode *);
void (*delete_inode) (struct inode *);
That's not nice indeed but it's also obviously safe and non very
intrusive. It's definitely _not_ the "worst thing one can do to the VFS"
IMHO :).
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:00:23 EST