5 Apr
2011
5 Apr
'11
12:13 p.m.
No .. Adam is right about JFS as an option.
ext3 has journaling as an add-on after-construction,
while JFS is created with journaling from scratch.
Also, JFS originates from OS/2, which is much closer to NT than AIX/Linux.
I would surmise that the OSS snapshot is an OS/2 -> AIX -> Linux port.
I'm getting all the relevant sources, and have mailed the maintainer at IBM
for a mirror of the original OSS snapshot, since I think that the older the
code
the closer it is to OS/2, and therefore fewer Linux kernel dependencies to
deal
with in converting it to an IFS.
WBR // Love
2011/4/5 Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo <elhoir(a)gmail.com>
"journaling file system in ReactOS" ====>
Ext3/4 :D
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Adam <geekdundee(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I would also recommend looking at porting JFS -
the sources are available.
This is the file system that IBM originally used in OS/2 Warp 4.5X (and also
AIX if I am not mistaken) and is a very solid file system. Something IBM
seemed to be doing right.
I am not sure about all the details of it, but AFAIK it also supports
things like ACLs too.
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 17:56:40 +1000, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Bryan,
Just like Aleksey, I would welcome an effort to simplify IFS
implementation.
Seen as NTFS is (and always will be?) not well documented, I've been
thinking about
supporting some alternative, OSS, journaling file system in ReactOS, e.g.
ReiserFS,
to allow us to provide the (relative) fail-safety of file transaction
journaling that NTFS has.
Also, hopefully, to enable us to implement NT's access privilege
system (Security) on files.
So far, it remains just a thought, since I can't allocate the time to
adapt
e.g ReiserFS to
an NT IFS, and if I'm not mistaken, our IFS implementation has
shortcomings
of it's own
which You may need to address as well in implementing Your proposal.
In addition to "Windows NT File System Internals" I would also recommend
"Windows Internals, 4th Edition" for additional/complementary insight.
Especially Ch.12 "File Systems", but Ch.8-12 are all relevant, and the
whole
book is strongly recommended (by everyone, I think).
It will be a BIG job I think (thesis big), and I hope You have the
structural
"common sense" to make it a success, and not a mess ;).
It would be most welcome !
Comment Your code scrupulously :)
Best Regards
// Love
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 1:55 PM, <ros-dev-request(a)reactos.org> wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Bryan Donlan <bdonlan(a)gmail.com>
> To: ReactOS Development List <ros-dev(a)reactos.org>
> Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 18:26:23 -0400
> Subject: [ros-dev] [GSoC] IFS wrapper project proposal draft
> Hello,
>
> After reading the ReactOS GSoC ideas page, I became interested in the
> IFS wrapper driver project idea[1], and would appreciate any comments
> on my project proposal before I formally submit it.
>
> First, a bit about me. I am a student in a dual-major program,
> studying Computer Science and Japanese at the University of
> Massachusetts at Amherst. I have had some experience in kernel
> development previously; as part of an internship at a research project
> at my University, I wrote some network flow analysis code running in
> the Linux kernel. While filesystem work will be a first for me, I
> think it will be an interesting leaning experience. I am fluent in
> English and Japanese, and am in the UTC-0400 timezone (TZ=US/Eastern).
> My freenode username is bd_, and my myReactOS username is bdonlan.
>
> In preparation for writing this proposal, I obtained a copy of the
> "Windows NT File System Internals: A Developer's Guide" book from
> O'Reilly. Although a bit dated, it has been enourmously helpful in
> helping me get an idea of what I'm getting into.
>
> My goal in this project will be to write a library to significantly
> simplify writing a NT File System Driver. Although writing a
> kernel-mode filesystem will never be as easy as with, eg, FUSE, it
> should be possible to abstract away many of the idiosyncracies of the
> NT filesystem API, at least. For example, the wrapper library may
> handle:
> * Automatically queueing asynchronous filesystem operations on a worker
> thread
> * Parsing paths and invoking a FS-supplied traversal function for each
> directory element
> * Interfacing with the NT cache manager, including flushing data from
> the cache when a non-cached operation is performed on a cached file,
> and establishing cache maps for the underlying device for a disk-based
> file system
> * Providing a common implementation of byte range locks and oplocks,
> and disabling fast I/O when they are in use
> * Caching directory entry lookups
> * Performing typical input validation/security checks needed by all NT
> filesystems
> * Helper tools may also be provided to load pseudo-filesystems
> (filesystems with neither network nor disk backing) on an ad-hoc basis
>
> Essentially, the library should make it easy for the filesystem
> designer to focus on the actual filesystem, rather than the NT IFS
> interfaces - a read call would be able to skip all the preparation and
> checks, and directly go to perform the actual I/O.
>
> Major milestones for the project may include:
> - Prepare a sketch of the API and callbacks for the IFS helper library
> (subject to change if necessary)
> - Implement enough of the wrapper library to implement a simple
> pseudo-filesystem demonstrating non-cached reads and writes
> - Add support for cached reads/writes (interaction with the cache
> manager, caching for on-disk metadata)
> - Demonstrate a disk-based filesystem without metadata update support
> (MINIX FS or FAT?)
> - Demonstrate a disk-based filesystem with full read-write support
> - If time allows, add support for ancillary features, such as byte
> locks, oplocks, and notify watchers.
>
> The interfaces exposed by the filesystem library will of course be
> clearly documented. Filesystems needing more advanced support will
> also be able to override any IFS callbacks they choose.
>
> I have an existing consulting commitment that will take some of my
> time, but I expect to be able to put in 20-30 hours of work per week
> into this project. Further, I hereby swear that I have not used nor
> seen the source code to any version of the Windows operating system
> nor any Microsoft product that may be related to the proposed project
> that is under a license incompatible with contribution to ReactOS,
> including but not limited to the leaked Windows 2000 source code and
> the Windows Research Kernel.
>
> I would appreciate any comments on my proposal before formally
> submitting it to the GSoC site.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bryan Donlan
>
>
>
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev