[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [dm-devel] [RFC][PATCH] dm-cache (block level disk cache target): UPDATE

On 10/18/2011 10:48 PM, Stephen Bromfield wrote:
A new patch for the 2.6.39 kernel.

Signed-off-by: Ming Zhao<dm-cache googlegroups com>

Hmm? This is implementation #1 out of three.
And, incidentally, the least maintained; 2.3.39 isn't exactly the most recent kernel.

(Otherwise one does wonder why Ming Zhao hasn't posted it himself).
(Incidentally, can we have a rule that the person sending a patch _has_ to be listed as 'Signed-off-by', ie has to be the one actually working on it?)

flashcache and that one from Tao Ma & Coly Li are the other two versions of the same beast, all sharing the same codebase.

Not to mention my (slightly different) implementation which I'll be presenting at LinuxCon Europe next week.

So maybe, just maybe, we should get out heads together and discuss the merits and shortcomings of the various implementations. And decide on a single implementation, not 4. Or a framework allowing for all these variances.

But so it's hard to see why this implementation should go upstream and none of the others.

And I somehow doubt Alasdair would agree on having several implementations on the same topic.


Dr. Hannes Reinecke		      zSeries & Storage
hare suse de			      +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: J. Hawn, J. Guild, F. Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]