Re: [lvm-devel] dm fs?

[Joe Thornber]

On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 04:37:28PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> What is the status of dmfs going into mainline?
> 
> I saw that Greg KH posted a patch with some corrections to dmfs for
> 2.5.50?
> 
> IMO it would be nice to have a kernel config option that makes the
> ioctl method optional when dmfs is set to y or m in kernel config.
> That will not only save a bit of code space, but it will also serve to
> encourage use of dmfs.  :)

The last version I released is here: 

http://people.sistina.com/~thornber/patches/2.5-unstable/2.5.51/2.5.51-dmfs-1.tar.bz2

There are still a couple of easy to fix issues with it (eg. the
kmalloc while a spin lock is held that Andrew Morton pointed out :).

Both Andrew Morton and Greg KH expressed concerns with the way I've
mapped the dm semantics onto the filesystem
(http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=103975736919315&w=2).
So Greg is currently trying to get a sysfs interface working.

We need to get a concensus of opinion in the community as to what is a
good interface.  I'm not going to be rushed into including something
in dm that could cause critism for years to come.  dmfs is what
Alasdair Kergon and I have proposed, we're just waiting for an
alternative to kick off the discussions ATM.

- Joe