On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 02:42:36AM -0400, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Friday 02 September 2005 20:16, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> > As far as userspace dlm apis go, dlmfs already abstracts away a large part
> > of the dlm interaction...
>
> Dumb question, why can't you use sysfs for this instead of rolli
On Friday 02 September 2005 20:16, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> As far as userspace dlm apis go, dlmfs already abstracts away a large part
> of the dlm interaction...
Dumb question, why can't you use sysfs for this instead of rolling your own?
Side note: you seem to have deleted all the 2.6.12-rc4 patche
On Saturday 03 September 2005 02:14, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-09-03 at 13:18 +0800, David Teigland wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:21:04PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > - Why GFS is better than OCFS2, or has functionality which
>
On Sat, 2005-09-03 at 13:18 +0800, David Teigland wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:21:04PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > - Why GFS is better than OCFS2, or has functionality which OCFS2 cannot
> > > > possibly gain (or vice versa)
> > > >
> > > >
On Friday 02 September 2005 17:17, Andi Kleen wrote:
> The only thing that should be probably resolved is a common API
> for at least the clustered lock manager. Having multiple
> incompatible user space APIs for that would be sad.
The only current users of dlms are cluster filesystems. There are
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 05:44:03PM +0800, David Teigland wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:35:23PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> > + gfs2_assert(gl->gl_sbd, atomic_read(&gl->gl_count) > 0,);
>
> > what is gfs2_assert() about anyway? please just use BUG_ON directly
> > everywhere
>
> Whe
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:21:04PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > - Why GFS is better than OCFS2, or has functionality which OCFS2 cannot
> > > possibly gain (or vice versa)
> > >
> > > - Relative merits of the two offerings
> >
> > You missed the import
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 11:17:08PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> The only thing that should be probably resolved is a common API
> for at least the clustered lock manager. Having multiple
> incompatible user space APIs for that would be sad.
As far as userspace dlm apis go, dlmfs already abstracts awa
I have to correct an error in perspective, or at least in the wording of
it, in the following, because it affects how people see the big picture in
trying to decide how the filesystem types in question fit into the world:
>Shared storage can be more efficient than network file
>systems like NFS
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > - Why GFS is better than OCFS2, or has functionality which OCFS2 cannot
> > > possibly gain (or vice versa)
> > >
> > > - Relative merits of the two offerings
> >
> > You missed the important one - people actively use it and have been for
> >
On Friday 02 September 2005 15:41, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> Already dead ;)
>
> 2.6.13-mm1: remove-ia_attr_flags.patch
>
> Miklos
Wow, the pace of Linux development really is picking up. Now patches are
applied before I even send them!
Regards,
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the l
Already dead ;)
2.6.13-mm1: remove-ia_attr_flags.patch
Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Struct iattr is not involved any more in such things as NOATIME inode flags.
There are no in-tree users of ia_attr_flags.
Signed-off-by Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff -up --recursive 2.6.13-rc5-mm1.clean/fs/hostfs/hostfs.h
2.6.13-rc5-mm1/fs/hostfs/hostfs.h
--- 2.6.13-rc5-mm1.clean/fs/h
On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 10:46 -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Sep 02, 2005 07:42 -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> > They put the inode on the superblock's dirty list and make the inode as
> > dirty in the i_state field. This makes sure that the inode will
> > eventually be written to disk.
> >
> >
On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 11:55 +0200, David Sanchez wrote:
> Hi,
> Please, could somebody explain me what the mark_inode_dirty* functions
> do and what is the difference between mark_inode_dirty and
> mark_inode_dirty_sync ?
They put the inode on the superblock's dirty list and make the inode as
dirt
On Fri, 2 September 2005 17:44:03 +0800, David Teigland wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:35:23PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> > + gfs2_assert(gl->gl_sbd, atomic_read(&gl->gl_count) > 0,);
>
> > what is gfs2_assert() about anyway? please just use BUG_ON directly
> > everywhere
>
> When
Hi,
Please, could somebody explain me what the mark_inode_dirty* functions
do and what is the difference between mark_inode_dirty and
mark_inode_dirty_sync ?
Thanks
David SANCHEZ
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTEC
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:35:23PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> + gfs2_assert(gl->gl_sbd, atomic_read(&gl->gl_count) > 0,);
> what is gfs2_assert() about anyway? please just use BUG_ON directly
> everywhere
When a machine has many gfs file systems mounted at once it can be useful
to know
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 06:56:03PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Whether the gfs2 code is mergeable is a completely different question,
> and it seems at least debatable to submit a filesystem for inclusion
I actually asked what needs to be done for merging. We appreciate the
feedback and ar
19 matches
Mail list logo
