From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932238AbWDYOpa (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:45:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932240AbWDYOpa (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:45:30 -0400 Received: from wohnheim.fh-wedel.de ([213.39.233.138]:42447 "EHLO wohnheim.fh-wedel.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932238AbWDYOpa (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:45:30 -0400 Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:45:24 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn?= Engel To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Michael Holzheu , ioe-lkml@rameria.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mschwid2@de.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] s390: Hypervisor File System Message-ID: <20060425144524.GA12940@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> References: <20060424191941.7aa6412a.holzheu@de.ibm.com> <1145975582.11508.13.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1145975582.11508.13.camel@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 25 April 2006 17:33:01 +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > To state what I said earlier: the use of a global hypfs_sblk is > problematic because now we can only have the filesystem mounted once. So > I would really like to see some other way of updating. How do you feel > about the s_ops->fs_remount thing? It sounds as if part of hypfs is a global resource. Maybe the code could be split between a global get-and-store-data part and a per-filesystem representation part? Jörn -- Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent. -- Sun Tzu