Yury Yu. Rupasov wrote:
> Hello !
>
> I could not find new bugs.
>
> I did :
> 1. stress.sh 50 with big source tree (~750 MB)
> 2. postmark 50000 files, 50000 transactions
> 3. creating 1 million of small files
> 4. tar / untar kernel source tree
> 5. compile 2.3.51 kernel on reiserfs partition
> 6. bonnie++ with default parameters.
> 7. mongo.sh with default params and with 56000 files in 1 dir.
>
> Reiserfs-3-6-1 for linux-2.3.51 are stable. At least I have not found
> bugs yet.
Alex Viro's concerns are not about whether reiserfs passes stress
tests. They're about subtle, and not to subtle deadlock, livelock and
race conditions, and long term maintainability.
As soon as an fs goes into the kernel, even marked as "experimental",
then every time Alex modifies VFS he has to look at all the kernel
filesystems and verify that his VFS changes are valid. Sometimes this
means he has to change the filesystems themselves. Also Alex Viro is
not the only person who does this.
That can only be done if every fs in a single kernel release makes the
same set of assumptions about what to test, what locks are held for
different functions, when to call iput, dput, d_delete and d_move,
whether to check S_ISDIR etc.
Currently reiserfs does not make the same assumptions as the current
kernel filesystems. So it cannot be included even though it passes its
own stress tests: including reiserfs would create too much work for
people modifying and auditing VFS.
Sure you could keep a note with it saying "this filesystem is not
maintained in the kernel". But then there's no point including it in
the kernel tarball.
have a nice day,
-- Jamie
-
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 - 21:00:25 EST