Grant,
On 6/20/07, Michal Simek monstr@seznam.cz wrote:
ROMFS: Add support for ROMFS filesystem based on MTD system.
signed-off-by: Michal Simek monstr@monstr.eu
Patch is in attachement.
Please send your patches inline. It is harder to comment on patches that are attachments because I cannot hit 'reply' and start typing. Patches that don't get reviewed are harder to get merged. (git-send-email is your friend here)
I needed to cut and paste to write this email, but here are some comments.
OK. Next driver.
Also, it's looking more and more like there needs to be an abstraction between filesystems and block devices. (More of a general comment than a comment on your patch) Overriding cmd_jffs2 to do more and more filesystems just smells wrong.
Otherwise, it's a good looking driver.
Yes. I agree with you. System around block devices and filesystems needs rebuild.
/*
- JFFS2/CRAMFS support
- JFFS2/CRAMFS/ROMFS support
Hmmm, perhaps the filename cmd_jffs2.c needs to be changed.
It's the same design goal as CRAMFS.
- str[0] = 'h';
- break;
- case 1:
- str[0] = 'd';
- break;
- case 2:
- str[0] = 'f';
- break;
- case 3:
- str[0] = 'l';
- break;
- case 4:
- str[0] = 'b';
- break;
- case 5:
- str[0] = 'c';
- break;
- case 6:
- str[0] = 's';
- break;
- case 7:
- str[0] = 'p';
- break;
- default:
- str[0] = '?';
- }
This can be done in a less verbose way by using an offset into a table or string.
Yes, it can be.
- if (inode->next & 0x8) {
- str[1] = 'x';
- } else {
- str[1] = '-';
- }
Maybe? str[1] = inode->next & 0x8 ? 'x' : '-';
It can be accepted.
Michal Simek