LFS support for smbfs in 2.5, and other improvements
Hi,
I noticed that LFS support has made it into 2.5, but it's not on the status list (http://kernelnewbies.org/status/latest.html).
IIRC there were some plans to add oplock support to smbfs (newbie alert:
linux smb client, oplocks are already in samba server). Maybe that should be tracked on the status too.
Mike
Quoted 8 lines · Mike Fedyk
Hi,
I noticed that LFS support has made it into 2.5, but it's not on the status list (http://kernelnewbies.org/status/latest.html).
IIRC there were some plans to add oplock support to smbfs (newbie alert:
linux smb client, oplocks are already in samba server). Maybe that should be tracked on the status too.
Using the terminology from the status page I guess this could be the smbfs list:
Alpha smbfs: I/O rewrite, smbiod
Alpha smbfs: Fcntl locking + smb oplock support
Alpha smbfs: smbconnect for better fstab integration
Planning smbfs: Readahead support (async readpage/writepage)
Planning smbfs: Read/Write request merging
But won't the list become very long if every little driver included all the planned changes? Not my problem I guess ...
Also I don't know if any of this will be ready to be merged within the 6 month limit mentioned in one of the early announcements.
Regarding the updated statuspage, it isn't the "Samba filesystem", it is the SMB filesystem (usually smbfs, SMBFS, SMBfs and possibly other variations).
/Urban
Quoted 11 lines
Using the terminology from the status page I guess this could be the smbfs list:
Alpha smbfs: I/O rewrite, smbiod
Alpha smbfs: Fcntl locking + smb oplock support
Alpha smbfs: smbconnect for better fstab integration
Planning smbfs: Readahead support (async readpage/writepage)
Planning smbfs: Read/Write request mergingBut won't the list become very long if every little driver included all the planned changes? Not my problem I guess ...
Yes, I am trying to limit the status list to the big items so that it stays readable for people.
Quoted 2 lines
Also I don't know if any of this will be ready to be merged within the 6 month limit mentioned in one of the early announcements.
Why don't we do this, if there is anything that gets close to inclusion and you feel it is a big thing lots of people have been anxiously waiting for, let me know and I'll put it in.
Quoted 3 lines
Regarding the updated statuspage, it isn't the "Samba filesystem", it is the SMB filesystem (usually smbfs, SMBFS, SMBfs and possibly other variations).
Fixed, thanks.
-- Guillaume