On Wed, 2002-09-11 at 11:03, Alan Cox wrote:
> Thats never been the big concern. The problem has always been that XFS
> was very invasive code so it might break stuff for people who dont
> choose to use experimental xfs stuff. Thats slowly improving
Alan -
The last patch Christoph posted against 2.5 is not the least bit
invasive. Excluding documentation and configuration files, these are
the changes:
o 1 new process flag: +#define PF_FSTRANS 0x00100000
o 1 new CTL_VM name: + VM_PAGEBUF=18
o 1 new CTL_FS name: + FS_XFS=17
o 1 exported symbol: +EXPORT_SYMBOL(mark_page_accessed);
and of course an addition to fs/Makefile:
+obj-$(CONFIG_XFS_FS) += xfs/
That's it. The rest is under fs/xfs.
(2.4 is more invasive, but this thread started out talking about XFS in
2.5).
-Eric
-- Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs sandeen@sgi.com SGI, Inc. 651-683-3102- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 15 2002 - 22:00:26 EST