Just clarify a few things. Don't you hate rereading a long work you
wrote? (oh, you're supposed to do that *before* you press send?).

On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 03:45:28AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:

I'm announcing "fsblock" now because it is quite intrusive and so I'd
like to get some thoughts about significantly changing this core part
of the kernel.

fsblock is a rewrite of the "buffer layer" (ding dong the witch is
dead), which I have been working on, on and off and is now at the stage
where some of the basics are working-ish. This email is going to be
long...

Firstly, what is the buffer layer?  The buffer layer isn't really a
buffer layer as in the buffer cache of unix: the block device cache
is unified with the pagecache (in terms of the pagecache, a blkdev
file is just like any other, but with a 1:1 mapping between offset
and block).

I mean, in Linux, the block device cache is unified. UNIX I believe
did all its caching in a buffer cache, below the filesystem.

 

- Large block support. I can mount and run an 8K block size minix3 fs on
  my 4K page system and it didn't require anything special in the fs. We

Oh, and I don't have a Linux mkfs that makes minixv3 filesystems.
I had an image kindly made for me because I don't use minix. If
you want to test large block support, I won't email it to you though:
you can just convert ext2 or ext3 to fsblock ;)

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>