TESTCASES [[/10]]
-----------------
  -3 Didn't test/explain large files
  -3 Didn't test/explain file growth
  -2 Didn't test/explain directories
  -2 Didn't test/explain cache performance
  +1...+3 Bonus for demonstrating VM running on file system


DESIGN [[/40]]
--------------

DESIGNDOC
  -5 Doesn't explain synchronization
  -5 Doesn't explain inode design (e.g. direct, indirect, etc. structure)
  -5 Doesn't explain block cache structure
  -5 Doesn't explain read-ahead/write-behind design

Overall:
  -1 Gratuitous use of malloc() (e.g. for allocating a list or a lock)
  -1 Inappropriate use of ASSERT (e.g. to verify that malloc() succeeded)

Synchronization and consistency
  -5 One big lock for entire file system
  -3 Doesn't mark inode deleted in bitmap when file removed and closed
  -2 Doesn't mark indirect blocks deleted in bitmap when file removed, closed
  -5 Keeps copy of inode_disk in inode but doesn't account for it in cache

Large Files
  -5 No direct blocks
  -10 No indirect or doubly indirect blocks of any sort

Subdirectories
  -2 Directories cannot grow
  +1 Supports Unix-like . and ..
  +2 Supports recursive directory removal

Buffer Cache
  -3 Uses linear search instead of hash table, etc.
  -2 Poor cache replacement algorithm (not LRU, etc.)
  -1 Does not prioritize metadata in cache
  -2 Locks entire cache during I/O

Read-Ahead/Write-Behind (max -10)
  -7 No read-ahead
  -7 No write-behind
  -5 Busy-waiting in write-behind thread
  -2 Spawns a new thread on every block read
  +2 Prioritizes real reads over read-ahead
    

STYLE [[/10]]
-------------
  -5...-10 Fixing code after submission
  -5 Doesn't compile as submitted
  +1...+5 Cool test programs etc.


COMMENTS
--------