[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <44DA03D1.1000100@slaphack.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:48:33 -0400
From: David Masover <ninja@...phack.com>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
CC: Hans Reiser <reiser@...esys.com>,
Edward Shishkin <edward@...esys.com>,
Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@....de>, ric@....com,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Adrian Ulrich <reiser4@...nkenlights.ch>,
"Horst H. von Brand" <vonbrand@....utfsm.cl>,
bernd-schubert@....de, reiserfs-list@...esys.com,
jbglaw@...-owl.de, clay.barnes@...il.com, rudy@...ons.demon.nl,
ipso@...ppymail.ca, lkml@...productions.com, jeff@...zik.org,
tytso@....edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org
regarding reiser4 inclusion
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>> Yes, it looks like a business of node plugin, but AFAIK, you
>>> objected against such checks:
>> Did I really? Well, I think that allowing users to choose whether to
>> checksum or not is a reasonable thing to allow them. I personally would
>> skip the checksum on my computer, but others....
>>
>> It could be a useful mkfs option....
>
> It should preferably a runtime tunable variable, at best even
> per-superblock and (overriding the sb setting), per-file.
Sounds almost exactly like a plugin. And yes, that would be the way to
do it, especially considering some files will already have internal
consistency checking -- just as we should allow direct disk IO to some
files (no journaling) when the files in question are databases that do
their own journaling.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists