[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y6gp2brh.fsf@openvz.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:30:58 +0400
From: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
tytso@....edu, adilger@....com, jack@...e.cz, david@...morbit.com,
viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, xemul@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: Ping.
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 01:00:58PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>> Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org> writes:
>>
>> > This is 6'th version of extened inode owner patch-set.
>> > Please review it tell me what do you think about all this.
>> > Are you agree with this approach?
>> > Are you worry about some implementation details?
>> > Is it ready for merge to some devel's tree?
>> Ping. I haven't got response about the patchset, just small note about
>> xattr-name from Andreas.
>> Please clarify what do you think about whole idea and
>> current patch-set state. What do i have to do to make a progress?
>
> As long as you still have the awkward ifdefs and different semantics for
About ifdefs style:
How can i avoid CONFIG_PROJECT_ID without bloating inode size?
embedded people will kill me for this.
I just act similar quota code, or you want protect prjid logic
via quota config option?
I don't remember, are we already talk about this?
If so please remind me your vision.
> "isolation" vs "not" there's still a NACK from me. But in the end Al
> will have to decide if he wants to take your patches or not.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists