--6zdv2QT/q3FMhpsV
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 05:15:19PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <6b2d1e19050909100779f91b0a@mail.gmail.com>,
> Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >[ I'm CC'ing my SoC project mentor ]
> >
> >The tmpfs developed during the Summer of Code program is now
> >usable, somewhat resource-friendly (improved a lot in the past
> >few days) but still has some bugs and misfeatures.  The most
> >important ones:
> >- Does not use anonymous memory for file meta-data.
> >- Some random panics caused due to incorrect memory accesses.
> >  I *suspect* these are related in some way to the usage of wired
> >  kernel memory and exhausting it, so fixing the previous item properly
> >  may also fix this one.
> >- NFS support is broken.
> >
> >The thing is that many people (mostly developers) is asking me
> >when it will be integrated into NetBSD's main source tree.  The
> >advantages of importing it now:
> >- It is easier for people to test it.  Just enable it in the kernel and
> >  voila!
> >- It is easier for other developers to contribute, if they want to.
> >- The current sources have a lot of CVS history attached to them,
> >  all of which will be lost during the import.  Importing it sooner
> >  means we will loose less history.  (With "import" I'm referring to
> >  cvs-adding files.)
> >
> >The disadvantages... well, as long as it stays disabled by default,
> >there are no disadvantages, I think.  But if people use it on purpose,
> >they can expect problems.  (The manual pages warn them about
> >experimental code ;)
> >
> >Note that all the files are licensed under the official TNF license.
> >
> >So what do you people think?  Can/should it be incorporated now
> >or should it wait?  Until which point?
>=20
> I am all for importing it, but your sponsor should review it and give
> his ok first.

I think importing will be fine. I haven't had a chance to dive into the=20
code, but all of the issues Julio has been working on reflect a refinement=
=20
of the implementation. And as a non-default component, I think it will be=
=20
fine. I think it is at the point where it will need more use to find=20
issues.

Take care,

Bill

--6zdv2QT/q3FMhpsV
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFDId83Wz+3JHUci9cRAtVwAKCEjoXVbaKXzxUH/JNIf51nVFKvywCfT18L
uWRZh/CvF5keGDVvSPEFUIg=
=H82v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--6zdv2QT/q3FMhpsV--