LP# 440522: FSCACHE modules not compiled in
lists at nerdbynature.de
Tue Mar 9 20:14:27 UTC 2010
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 at 06:56, Tim Gardner wrote:
> The issue with NFS_FSCACHE in particular is that upstream support appears to
> be lukewarm, e.g., neither fscache.c or fscache-index.c has been touched since
> April 2009,
According to git-log, fs/nfs/fscache.c, has been touched in Sep 2009, Nov
2009 and now in March again. fs/fscache has been touched in Nov 2009, the
same goes for fs/cachefiles.
> yet the feature is still marked EXPERIMENTAL.
As stated in the bugreport this flag has been removed upstream now, for
2.6.34. However, as pointed out in the report and in  too, the
EXPERIMENTAL flag is not considered useful any more by many upstream
Furthermore, Ubuntu has enabled other EXPERIMENTAL features (e.g.
CONFIG_FSCACHE, which only recently had its EXPERIMENTAL flag removed).
> Furthermore, NFS_FSCACHE cannot be built as a module
Indeed, the bug description should be changed :-)
> i.e., enabling this feature is going to affect the base NFS implementation.
> Until this situation changes, I'm not going into a long term release with
> an experimental feature in the mainline NFS path.
OpenSuse does it (since at least May 2005), Fedora does it too. Again,
I agree with Arjan here: it's not EXPERIMENTAL just because someone
tagged it so. If not enabled, nothing changes from a user's perspective.
If bugs are found (with caching enabled or not), they're likely NOT to
occur only on Ubuntu machines but will have to be addressed upstream.
BOFH excuse #68:
only available on a need to know basis
More information about the kernel-team