[I've reordered the quotes, hope nobody minds; also cc'd fsdevel]
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 08:06:11AM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Could you expand a bit on your reasons to use an own buffer cache
> > instead of the standard Linux one ? Also what does this async
> > manager offer over the normal asynchronous block device interface ?
[..]
> The Linux Buffer Cache does not present a logical block cache for
> NetWare's flavor of mirroring support, although basically what's there
> is implemented as a Logical Block Cache on top of the Linux Buffer
> Cache. [..]
AIUI [0], Al Viro, Stephen Tweedie, and a number of others have some
interesting plans for the block device layer, buffer cache and page cache,
and the interactions between them and with the VFS -- for 2.5. I assume
they're busy with tidying up 2.4pre loose ends at the moment, but hopefully
after 2.4 is out the door and stable there will be some discussion of the
planned changes on linux-fsdevel. It sounds (I've not looked at your code yet)
like your input would be useful when that happens. An I/O system that meets
everyone's needs for 2.6 would be a great goal..
BTW, regarding your comments about Linux documentation - have you looked at
the work Alan Cox is doing on this yet?
Cheers,
Steve
[0] Which is probably not very well..
-- By doing just a little every day, you can gradually let the task completely overwhelm you.- 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 : Fri Mar 31 2000 - 21:00:25 EST