Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Matt Mackall
Date: Monday, August 6, 2007 - 10:20 am

On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 05:43:54PM +1000, Lindsay Roberts wrote:

It seems to me that the initial design goals of romfs were:

a) space efficiency
b) simplicity

..with performance basically ignored. On an actual ROM-backed
filesystem, alignment doesn't help you until it becomes large enough
that you can execute pages in place.

And I don't think your reproduceability concern was even on the radar.
So naming a new filesystem romfs which has the priorities:

a) performance
b) reproduceability

seems like it's going to disappoint and confuse people who were
aligned with the original goals.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Lindsay Roberts, (Thu Jul 12, 11:01 pm)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Andrew Morton, (Tue Jul 17, 1:36 am)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Matt Mackall, (Tue Jul 17, 12:21 pm)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Lindsay Roberts, (Tue Jul 17, 8:16 pm)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Tim Bird, (Wed Jul 18, 10:02 am)
Re: [Celinux-dev] Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Greg Ungerer, (Wed Jul 25, 12:28 am)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Pavel Machek, (Wed Jul 25, 11:40 am)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Phillip Susi, (Mon Jul 30, 11:12 am)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Rene Herman, (Mon Jul 30, 11:29 am)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Lindsay Roberts, (Mon Aug 6, 12:43 am)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Matt Mackall, (Mon Aug 6, 10:20 am)
Re: [PATCH] fs: Add romfs version 2, Sergey Vlasov, (Mon Aug 6, 12:41 pm)