> W.r.t. code or fixes, I'm afraid this is not only about developer work > but probably also about simple work analysis and kind of direction > discussion. So far what I've read is that softdep does have some > unreliability issues on somehow limited platforms: either small kernel > memory or slow disk drive or even buggy disk drive. So in ideal world > this code may run reliable, the problem is that make it reliable also > in limited world may be a huge amount of work. I've not tried to > compare softdep in Open and Free, but the difference in just code size > is quite huge: > Free: sys/ufs/ffs/*softdep* : 10k lines > Open: sys/ufs/ffs/*softdep* : 4k lines > > Yes, Free also adds softdep journaling. on the other hand Net > completely abandoned softdep in favour of wapbl, this thing is > interesting since it's about ~1k lines. Net also as the only one from > *BSD supports ffs snapshoting, this is about another ~2k lines of > code. Surely I count with ideal world situation and that related > functionality is in related files, still some code spreads into > another files, but I still hope this kind of shows some rough picture > here. > > The question is what's better direction for OpenBSD, either if to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > spend time on softdep which will probably also involve looking into > Free code for possible fixes or to go more Net route and bring wapbl > to the table. > > Any word on that would be appreciated. Thanks!
Your mail sounds like a beg. Perhaps I am being too sensitive. Any coding direction that has people working on it, will eventually have some effect. But it requires code study, not running wc. You don't grow good vegetables in your own garden by testing the plumpness of a tomato at Safeway. I could run wc until the cows go home, and not find or fix a single vfs layer bug. I am not trying to be crass -- I am being entirely honest about how software improves. It improves because someome tries. Period. Bugs rarely fix themselves when there is little actual attention / effort. You do not seem to be approaching the code in any way at all; wc annotation comes off like mailing list stroking. Perhaps you don't have capabilities in this area, honestly, I don't have vfs layer patience this year either, but at least I don't try to fake it... A vector without force behind it is not a useful vector.
