From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A62398F for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 18:09:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84D651FDED for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 18:09:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.44]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 003CE20E4A for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 14:09:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 11:13:19 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Daniel Phillips Message-ID: <20140529181319.GA24218@kroah.com> References: <53877319.5060407@partner.samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53877319.5060407@partner.samsung.com> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [topic] Richer internal block API List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:49:13AM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote: > Hi Neil, > > This will be my annual proposal to open a general discussion about improving > the internal block API, to be capable of doing all the things that the ZFS > crowd claim are impossible without rampantly violating filesystem/raid > layering. Attacking this in a storage-specific venue would also be good, > however I view this issue as being at least as central as a number of topics > already raised for general consideration. Why didn't you bring this up at the filesystem summit a few months ago? That's the best place for it, not at the kernel summit. > Full disclosure dept: I have an agenda. I want to add the equivalent of > Raidz etc to Tux3 without reimplementing a logical volume manager in the > filesystem. Like btrfs is doing? :) greg k-h