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 524E498F for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 17:49:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from usmailout4.samsung.com (mailout4.w2.samsung.com [211.189.100.14]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4438C20118 for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 17:49:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from uscpsbgex4.samsung.com (u125.gpu85.samsung.co.kr [203.254.195.125]) by usmailout4.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01(7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTP id <0N6C00A71K63PO80@usmailout4.samsung.com> for ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org; Thu, 29 May 2014 13:49:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-id: <53877319.5060407@partner.samsung.com> Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 10:49:13 -0700 From: Daniel Phillips MIME-version: 1.0 To: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, NeilBrown Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: [Ksummit-discuss] [topic] Richer internal block API List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 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. 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. Regards, Daniel