On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 08:24:48AM -0700, Paul Goyette wrote: > It would appear that wapbl is only relevant for ffs file systems > (and in particular, only for ffs filesystems with a V2 superblock > format). > > Yet the current modularization of wapbl is not "dependant" on the > ffs module. (wapbl's required-list is empty.)
It would be the other way around. AIUI the non-ffs wapbl code is supposed to provide "fs-independent" services to ffs, whatever those are. Nobody has ever particularly explained why there are so many wapbl tentacles outside of ffs; it has more than softupdates did, and this was always one of the big criticisms of softupdates. I think it's supposed to be "reusable" fs block journaling code, but I don't see it as likely to be useful for any other fs. Maybe an ext3 implementation based on the current ext2 implementation might be able to use it; but in that case it would still more appropriately live in sys/ufs/ufs. -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org
