From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752021AbWG1Psj (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:48:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752022AbWG1Psj (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:48:39 -0400 Received: from 63-162-81-169.lisco.net ([63.162.81.169]:64677 "EHLO grunt.slaphack.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752021AbWG1Psi (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:48:38 -0400 Message-ID: <44CA31D2.70203@slaphack.com> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 10:48:34 -0500 From: David Masover User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Macintosh/20060530) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Horst H. von Brand" CC: Jeff Garzik , Hans Reiser , Andrew Morton , Theodore Tso , LKML , ReiserFS List , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: metadata plugins (was Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion) References: <200607281402.k6SE245v004715@laptop13.inf.utfsm.cl> In-Reply-To: <200607281402.k6SE245v004715@laptop13.inf.utfsm.cl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Horst H. von Brand wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: > > [...] > >> It is then simple to follow that train of logic: why not make it easy >> to replace the directory algorithm [and associated metadata]? or the >> file data space management algorithms? or even the inode handling? >> why not allow customers to replace a stock algorithm with an exotic, >> site-specific one? > > IMVHO, such experiments should/must be done in userspace. And AFAICS, they > can today. inode handling? Really? But what's wrong with people doing such experiments outside the kernel? AFAICS, "exotic, site-specific one" is not something that would be considered for inclusion.