From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261396AbVFZQqR (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jun 2005 12:46:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261398AbVFZQqR (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jun 2005 12:46:17 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:38787 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261396AbVFZQqM (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jun 2005 12:46:12 -0400 Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 17:46:06 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Hans Reiser Cc: Alexander Zarochentsev , Jeff Garzik , reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: reiser4 plugins Message-ID: <20050626164606.GA18942@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Hans Reiser , Alexander Zarochentsev , Jeff Garzik , reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20050620235458.5b437274.akpm@osdl.org> <42B8B9EE.7020002@namesys.com> <42B8BB5E.8090008@pobox.com> <200506221824.32995.zam@namesys.com> <20050622142947.GA26993@infradead.org> <42BA2ED5.6040309@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42BA2ED5.6040309@namesys.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 08:39:01PM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote: > Correct me if I am wrong: > > What exists currently in VFS are vector instances, not classes. Plugins, > selected by pluginids, are vector classes, with each pluginid selecting > a vector class. You propose to have the vector class layer (aka plugin > layer) in reiser4 export the vector instance to VFS for VFS to handle > for each object, rather than having VFS select reiser4 and reiser4 > selecting a vector class (aka plugin) which selects a method. > > If we agree on the above, then I will comment further. I'm a bit confused about what you're saying here. What does the 'vector' in all these expressions mean? In OO terminology our *_operation structures are interfaces. Each particular instance of such a struct that is filled with function pointers is a class. Each instance of an inode/file/dentry/superblock/... that uses these operation vectors is an object. What I propose (or rather demand ;-)) is that you don't duplicate this infrastructure, and add another dispath layer below these objects but instead re-use it for what it is done and only handle things specific to reiser4 in your own code.