Re: [PATCH 1/3] dlm: use configfs

[David Teigland <teigland@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 02:23:48PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 02:07:50PM +0800, David Teigland wrote:

> > + * /config/dlm/<cluster>/spaces/<space>/nodes/<node>/nodeid
> > + * /config/dlm/<cluster>/spaces/<space>/nodes/<node>/weight
> > + * /config/dlm/<cluster>/comms/<comm>/nodeid
> > + * /config/dlm/<cluster>/comms/<comm>/local
> > + * /config/dlm/<cluster>/comms/<comm>/addr
>
> So what happened to factoring out the common parts of ocfs2_nodemanager?
> I was quite a big fan of that approach :) Or am I just misunderstanding
> what these patches do?

The nodemanager RFC I sent a month ago
  http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=112166723919347&w=2

amounts to half of dlm/config.c (everything under comms/ above) moved into
a separate kernel module.  That would be trivial to do, and is still an
option to bat around.

I question whether factoring such a small chunk into a separate module is
really worth it, though?  Making all of config.c (all of /config/dlm/
above) into a separate module wouldn't seem quite so strange.  It would
require just a few lines of code to turn it into a stand alone module.

Dave

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/