From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261872AbVF0L2n (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2005 07:28:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261903AbVF0L2m (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2005 07:28:42 -0400 Received: from relay2.beelinegprs.ru ([217.118.71.5]:45790 "EHLO relay1.beelinegprs.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261872AbVF0L2l (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2005 07:28:41 -0400 From: Alexander Zarochentsev Organization: namesys To: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: reiser4 plugins Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:28:49 +0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com, Hans Reiser , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20050620235458.5b437274.akpm@osdl.org> <200506271330.07451.zam@namesys.com> <20050627094223.GB5470@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20050627094223.GB5470@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200506271528.49674.zam@namesys.com> X-SpamTest-Info: Profile: Formal (248/050617) X-SpamTest-Info: Profile: Detect Hard No RBL (4/030526) X-SpamTest-Info: Profile: SysLog X-SpamTest-Info: Profile: Marking Spam - Subject (2/030321) X-SpamTest-Status: Not detected X-SpamTest-Version: SMTP-Filter Version 2.0.0 [0129], SpamtestISP/Release Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 27 June 2005 13:42, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 01:30:06PM +0400, Alexander Zarochentsev wrote: > > -- procfs has seq_file and sysconfig interfaces below the VFS and l-k > > people do not complain each day about layering violation ;-) Procfs is > > taken as an example because it deals with objects of different types, > > actually anybody may create own procfs objects more or less general way. > > seq_file actually works at the file_operations level, that's exactly > what I'm telling you to do. The old sub-callbacks are on their way out. not exactly. I meant that seq_file has its own VFS-like thing struct seq_operations. So I may assume that having own objects and their operations is allowed. The complains are about adding unnecessary level of indirection in the trivial reiser4 wrappers as reiser4_write(). > > I don't belive that you want to see all reiser4-specific things as item > > plugins, disk format plugins in the VFS. > > If you'd read the previous discussions you'd see that no one complained > about disk format plugins.