Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 00:37:18 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Importing the fusefs kernel module? Message-ID: <ia50qv$5kd$1@dough.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <20101025214630.GO2392@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <ia4qnl$bgl$1@dough.gmane.org> <20101025211904.GM2392@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <ia4td5$mh7$2@dough.gmane.org> <20101025214630.GO2392@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/25/10 23:46, Kostik Belousov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:38:44PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote: >> On 10/25/10 23:19, Kostik Belousov wrote: >> >>> This is not going to work. The code is unmaintained. Committing it into >>> the src/ just makes the pile of not working code in src/ bigger. >> >> Yes, but on the other hand, not importing it means that the code will >> only decay faster. It's basically a damage control issue :) > No, the fusefs it is not usable in its current state (means, causing random > kernel memory corruption). The current state of it (tested against sshfs on 8-stable amd64) is: - survives blogbench runs - survives fsx runs with arguments "-W -R -L", i.e. no mmaped operations, no file size / truncate operations ... without crashing. I cannot verify kernel memory corruption but I'm running a heavy X desktop here and it survives. > Committing it causes wrong users expectation, because code does > not work, and also looks like a trick to make it appears to be maintaned, > which obviously will not happen. > > Consider this as an official objection for the import, unless somebody > is going to take the maintainership. Noted.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ia50qv$5kd$1>