> Uh. I wish you contacted me first to avoid duplicating efforts. Were you
> working against 2.1.120 (which have pretty large UMSDOS patch from me in) or
> against something earlier ? Note that I also have many changes (cleaned most
> of the write part - hardlinks and rename are bothering me currently) after
> 2.1.120.
Hi Matija,
I started from the version in 2.1.120, but found that there were many
conceptual problems remaining, in particular with inode-centric code
that can't be made to work properly or reliably. I've rewritten it to
use dentries whenever possible,and this has simplified the code
considerably.
I've posted a snapshot patch that has most things working OK in both
plain and EMD directories, but still needs work on symlinks and
hardlinks.
The good news is that almost all of the iputs are gone, and it appears
free of inode and dentry leaks. Hopefully the remaining bugs won't be
too hard to track down :-)
Regards,
Bill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/faq.html