Hallo Janani,
* Janani k <3moonu3@...9...> [2015-05-13 04:36:14 +0530]:
It would make reviewing the code easier for us if you could provide the whole patch-set as a structured series of commits in a git repository instead of a patch file that has to be applied manually.
I dint get this point clearly. You want the repository online or all the patches of commits ?
To be honest I would prefer if I could simply add a remote git repo but that's just lazy me ☺. Since we use github to coordinate the development of Genode it is easier for us if contributors do that as well and is therefore the advised procedure. As a bonus we can also follow the development more closely. In any case, I am fine with a series of patch files that are somewhat structured, like one for your Ext2 implementation, one for incorporating it into the File_system session component and so on.
Also, although incorporating your work directly into dde_rump makes it easier for you to test the implementation it makes it more cumbersome for us to follow the process (especially in this case where the interesting bits are missing). For example, putting the functions for reading and write chunks from a block device into the File_system namespace is questionable and the reason for doing so is not clear.
Yeah I got the point. I am trying to move this entire thing to new folder but till then I will continue developing in dde_rump as it makes little bit easier for testing ext2 functionality. Regarding keeping block device I/O in filesystem was intended because at later point we could plugin other filesystems like ext3 or ext4. So this genode implementation of front end can be used directly. And especially in Filesystem namespace because the arguments and function implementation are tailored for Filesystems and they cant be used else where.
I see, thanks for explaining your reasoning. Well, at a later stage it might be desirable to provide the Ext2 implementation as a library so other components (e.g. fsck or mkfs) can utilize it. So making it stand-alone, albeit being currently located in the fs server source directory, is reasonable and the way it taps into the Block_session backend is okay for now.
That being said, I think you are on the right track by seperating the code handling the Ext2 processing from the File_system session frontend. For the time being I would post-pone reviewing your work in more detail and I would really appreciate it if you would clean up your code a bit.
Yeah I am cleaning up the code and thanks for reviewing the design part. And for a quick testing I could attach make a final patch with all source and headers included.
Thanks for taking the time to clean the code up, I am looking forward to it!
Can you please specify what step to take next.
I am afraid that is hard to do because it is not clear to me what your actual goal here is. I guess you want to contribute your Ext2 fs server to Genode in the end?
Regards Josef