On Sun, Aug 27, 2006 at 07:15:10PM +0200, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Sat, 26 August 2006 22:05:21 +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
...
> > > Or you can give Unionfs a try: http://www.unionfs.org
> >
> > UnionFS is great, but it incurs additional overhead, as it lives below the
> > real VFS. What could be really great, is to move some basic functionality
> > abstractions from UnionFS into VFS proper.
>
> If you want to make this vision happen, one of the missing pieces is a
> method for copyup, an in-kernel copying routine. Unionfs needs is
> just the same as Jan's patches do and in the past Linus didn't like my
> approach of using sendfile for it. You could take a stab at the
> splice code and see how that can be used for copyup.
The thing with union mounts/unionfs is that some of the functionality makes
sense to have in a file system while other parts make sense to have in the
VFS - the way I see it, namespace related bits should be in VFS while
persistent state should be done on the file system level.
Josef "Jeff" Sipek.
--
If I have trouble installing Linux, something is wrong. Very wrong.
- Linus Torvalds
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
