Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3

[Kyle Moffett]

On Jun 9, 2006, at 15:01:20, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Chase Venters wrote:
> > Now, granted, I really do agree with you about the whole code  
> > sharing thing. A fresh start is often just what you need. I'm just  
> > questioning if it wouldn't be better to do this fresh start  
> > immediately after going 48-bit, rather than before. That way,  
> > existing users that want that extra umph can have it today.
>
> Then you continue to crap up the code with
>
> 	if (48bit)
> 		...
> 	else
> 		...
>
> etc.
>
> The proper way to do this is "cp -a ext3 ext4" (excluding JBD as  
> Andrew mentioned), and then let evolution take its course.

Why not: "extX_ops.do_something_useful();", then have fs/ext/ext 
{2,3,4}_ops.c which implement those various operations just like we  
do for the Virtual Filesystem Switch?  Much as there are  
commonalities between all filesystems that get moved into the VFS;  
perhaps we should have a Virtual Ext Filesystem Switch (VEFS?  
VextFS?) which abstracts out the commonalities between the evolving  
ext{2,3} code and data format?  Such code would also provide a  
library of common routines which could be used to implement other  
specialized filesystems in the future.  Imagine a cluster-extfs which  
reuses some of the core extXfs code despite changing the on-disk  
format considerably!

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/