Re: XFS to main kernel source

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 04:31:37PM -0500, Steve Lord wrote:
> >  o The whole vnode layer
> 
> Two answers here - economics and code stability. This is a filesystem
> which has been worked on by people being payed to do so by a corporation,
> therefore there is a budget (long since blown). It was simpler and hence
> cheaper to wrap XFS in a conversion layer than to rework the code down
> into the bowels of the filesystem. Then the stability part of it, we
> started with a working filesystem, from an engineering standpoint it 
> made more sense to keep as much of the existing code base intact as
> possible - the less surgery performed the better in terms of keeping
> things running, and making it easy to take enhancements and fixes made
> in the Irix base into the Linux code (we don't do it the other way around).

I completly understand SGI's reson to do this - but yet I don't want to
see such code in the mainline for obvios reasons..

> >  o the hooks for a propritary clusterfs..
> 
> Well we have to make money on something you know.... and in reality
> there are not a lot of them in the filesystem.

Again I understand SGI's reasoning - but such hooks are usually not
considered to be a good thing line.

	Christoph

-- 
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.