Re: hfs support for blocksize != 512

[David A. Gatwood]

On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:

> I concur with this appraisal from Al Viro.  Single threading the VFS is
> going backwards -- not a good idea.

It sounds to me like different FSes have different needs.  Maybe the best
approach is to have two or three fs APIs, according to the needs of the
fs.  One could be a pure vnode interface, simple, serene, which puts the
locking in the driver by whatever means it chooses.  Lookup for NFS would
be on the vnode number, which would be kept in a kernel table until the
file was closed.  One could be the current multi-threaded arrangement. 
Finally, one might add a single-threaded-per-filesystem-instance method
for filesystems that don't thread well.

It just seems to me that this sort of thing need not be an either-or
situation.


Comments?
David

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/