Re: [PATCH 0/7] OMFS filesystem version 3

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Szabolcs Szakacsits <szaka@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi folks,

<big_snip />

I've just fought through this thread, maybe missed some points, 
and I'll try no to repeat to repeat arguments already said, but:

IMHO, many of the filesystems should belong to userland, 
(especially those I'd call "exotic"). Maybe some decision points:

* high complexity (-> not easy to debug)
* not required for booting 
* not yet matured (within kernel) 
* not performance critical
* requires much userland assistance
* not used permanently (just from time to time)
* not actually an IPC mechanism

My first candidate would be coda: 

It never worked well for me, even often have to reload the 
kernel driver. As most of the logic already *is* in userland, 
there wouldn't be a performance tradeoff when doing the kernel
interface entirely via FUSE or even let venus just be an 9P server.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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/