Re: [PATCH/RFC] Lustre VFS patch, version 2

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> The logic that _all_ modules and functionality need to be "in the tree"
> right from the start for hooks to be useful is flawed, I'm afraid.

And btw, I didn't say from the beginning.  I just want a comitment from
the lustre folks that they're merging it so we can work out the rough edges
together.  There's not much of a problem doing the merge spread over a few
kernel releases.

> Lustre alone would be, roughly, ~10MB more sources, just in the kernel.

I think for mainline mostly the client, aka the llite directory would
be interesting, so a linux box can simply join the lustre cluster.  the
metadata server and even worse the object storage box mods would require
tons of work to get anywhere a mergeable shape and are less interesting
anyway.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/