Lustre VFS patches for 2.6
Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]Versions newest first
- v1 Latest9 patches 9 repliesIn review
Patches in v1 No applies recorded yet
| # | Subject and files | Size | Replies | Applied |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1/9 | Lustre VFS patches for 2.6fs/ include/ | +20 | 0 replies | |
| 2/9 | Lustre VFS patches for 2.6fs/ include/ | +8 | 0 replies | |
| 3/9 | Lustre VFS patches for 2.6fs/ fs/ fs/ +5 more | +141 | 2 replies | |
| 4/9 | Lustre VFS patches for 2.6fs/ include/ include/ | +71 | 0 replies | |
| 5/9 | Lustre VFS patches for 2.6fs/ fs/ include/ +2 more | +10 | 1 reply | |
| 6/9 | Lustre VFS patches for 2.6include/ include/ | +7 | 0 replies | |
| 7/9 | Lustre VFS patches for 2.6fs/ fs/ fs/ +1 more | +9 | 0 replies | |
| 8/9 | Lustre VFS patches for 2.6fs/ include/ | +11 | 0 replies | |
| 9/9 | Lustre VFS patches for 2.6fs/ include/ | +3 | 0 replies |
Reviews trailers per patch
No Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Tested-by trailers for v1 yet.
Cover letter [0/9] Lustre VFS patches for 2.6
Hello!
Following this mail, there are nine patches necessary for Lustre support in 2.6. The patches are against latest 2.6 bk snapshot.
Compared to previous sets of patches, this one does not change existing structure and field names therefore leaving kernel VFS API completely intact. Also raw operations approach is changed, extra inode operation is introduced that is supposed to be called at the end of parent lookup and do necessary operations, if possible.
Of course it would be great if these patches would be included into the kernel right away (and that is one of the reasons this set of patches keeps old API intact). Also there were at least some interest in some of the patches from other parties (e.g. Trond Myklebust was interested in some intent changes as I remember) and we are ready to work with those so that the patches will suit their needs as well.
Bye,
Oleg