Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bcachefs Looks Like It Won't Make It For Linux 6.6

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by geearf View Post

    I believe it's the same yeah, Hans abandoned ReiserFS for Reiser4 and I think RH took over the maintenance, whether with bcache Suze took over.
    Suse took over ReiserFS, it was Chris Mason. Not sure, but this was the birth of Btrfs maybe. Chris was working for SuSE these days and maintainer of ReiserFS. As far as I remember, he was heavily influenced from this FS.

    Comment


    • #92
      Sorry the uncultured english speaking world did not clip that apparently:


      The only english reference about this seems to be about witcher, but meh

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by PuckPoltergeist View Post

        Suse took over ReiserFS, it was Chris Mason. Not sure, but this was the birth of Btrfs maybe. Chris was working for SuSE these days and maintainer of ReiserFS. As far as I remember, he was heavily influenced from this FS.
        Ah you may be right.
        Was btrfs not influenced by Reiser4 more than ReiserFS?

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
          Sorry the uncultured english speaking world did not clip that apparently:

          The only english reference about this seems to be about witcher, but meh
          You are wrong that cartoon has been done in English as the particular episode you referenced can buy it as part of "The Twelve Tasks of Asterix" also released in dub english as movie ~ 41 min in your will also find that item in the "The Twelve Tasks of Asterix".

          Remember Axterix wins that clip by understanding the bureaucracies rules and use them to his advantage.

          Software development when you want quality code like or not is nice process. Its really simple to get personal goals and ego and get upset.

          Remember people normally doing code quality reviews heck if they are people don't care about your personal wishes and wants they only care if the code is quality or not. Yes attempt to appeal to human mercy out the Intel 0-day bug bot is going to get yourself absolutely no where.

          This is a problem lot of people include of Kent have. They expect those who do code quality review to have interest in their project. Yes a compiler error/error that should not be there causes those human who do code quality review most of the time not to even bother wasting time to write email as they have tones of better quality code to review and leave it to the bots to deal with that.

          Now Kent attempted submit path was not taking him in contact with the bots.

          ​This is a classic chicken and egg that starts the complete mess.

          Kent was complain he could not find anyone to review his patches.
          Human code reviews were seeing code not high enough quality to be worth their time so leaving the code to the bots to do automated responses.
          Bots not seeing the code because the code had not attempted to be submitted to the Next branch.

          Yes Linux world chicken and end.
          1) Code does not reviewed by humans unless particular quality standard.
          2) Code only gets to a particular quality standard if it been reviewed.

          Yes the way out is attempt to submit against next branch and make absolutely sure you have no compiler/link errors.

          Comment


          • #95
            The main question I have is why did kent feel the need to ask about linux-next at all? This quote implies it's not so simple as "ofc it should go into linux-next duh"

            That question has even come up in meetings and no one could give a
            definitive answer; the suggestion was to email you and CC people and
            ask, which is precisely what I did.
            Who was in these meetings that had to ask? I know that Mr. Wong is active in the bcachefs community, if this has come up, it likely came across him too, who is an XFS maintainer and iomap maintainer.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Quackdoc View Post
              The main question I have is why did kent feel the need to ask about linux-next at all? This quote implies it's not so simple as "ofc it should go into linux-next duh"



              Who was in these meetings that had to ask? I know that Mr. Wong is active in the bcachefs community, if this has come up, it likely came across him too, who is an XFS maintainer and iomap maintainer.
              Stop feeding into Kent's delusion. When Christoph told him it should be in linux-next, Kent responded that he didn't think so. Then when Linus says, it really should be in there, then Kent remembers some far history about how he asked this question. If it was in any doubt, just do it. Kent really thinks linux-next is only for integration testing, but it's not, there's a ton of CI bots hammering that repo in all sorts of ways.

              The fact is Kent is acting like a victim, and it's not serving him well. He's actually making himself miserable, and for as much sympathy as it's getting him, it's not doing him one bit of good. Had he continued to discuss the open issues on rwsem/iomap instead of saying *rudely* that he doesn't want to discuss them until he's good and ready to (as well as tell people they were not willing to discuss it when he was willing), had he not accused everyone of wanting to cause him pain, being unpleasant, or worse, they would be on his side. He was told to wait for 6.7 during 6.5 merge window by the VFS maintainer, and he went radio silent, then popped up during 6.6 to hope that Linus would ignore everyone but Kent. He knew exactly what he was doing, so did Linus, and Linus called him out explicitly. He doomed himself, then to complete his delusion he calls everyone assh*les and signs off.

              Honestly, Kent's a great guy, but he's being irrational, and he needs to get over it. Now he's thinking about throwing away years of hard work? What's next, will he fork linux or move to BSD? He should stop doubling down on his righteousness.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                Just make 1 thought experiment assume that btrfs would not exist maybe not even ZFS, if that results in much delayed or maybe even not adding bcachefs to the kernel and having not 1 COW filesystem in the Kernel would be a disaster, from image point of view, freebsd people would make fun of linux for having a major advantage over linux and in the reasons to switch to linux from windows there would be a major point be crossed.

                So the only way this discussion is even a question which side is more reasonable is because BTRFS exists already.
                In reality if Linux didn't have a CoW filesystem it would be a loss for users but otherwise virtually nothing would change. The only other OS that's actually relevant in the real world is Windows, and it doesn't have a CoW filesystem either (ReFS has been around for more than a decade and still us not really usable. Freebsd fanboys will always hate Linux because reasons no matter what so that's neither here nor there.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by fitzie View Post

                  Stop feeding into Kent's delusion. When Christoph told him it should be in linux-next, Kent responded that he didn't think so. Then when Linus says, it really should be in there, then Kent remembers some far history about how he asked this question. If it was in any doubt, just do it. Kent really thinks linux-next is only for integration testing, but it's not, there's a ton of CI bots hammering that repo in all sorts of ways.

                  The fact is Kent is acting like a victim, and it's not serving him well. He's actually making himself miserable, and for as much sympathy as it's getting him, it's not doing him one bit of good. Had he continued to discuss the open issues on rwsem/iomap instead of saying *rudely* that he doesn't want to discuss them until he's good and ready to (as well as tell people they were not willing to discuss it when he was willing), had he not accused everyone of wanting to cause him pain, being unpleasant, or worse, they would be on his side. He was told to wait for 6.7 during 6.5 merge window by the VFS maintainer, and he went radio silent, then popped up during 6.6 to hope that Linus would ignore everyone but Kent. He knew exactly what he was doing, so did Linus, and Linus called him out explicitly. He doomed himself, then to complete his delusion he calls everyone assh*les and signs off.

                  Honestly, Kent's a great guy, but he's being irrational, and he needs to get over it. Now he's thinking about throwing away years of hard work? What's next, will he fork linux or move to BSD? He should stop doubling down on his righteousness.
                  Again if other maintainers are having issues deciding whether or not it should go into next, I don't think it's far-fetched to get input from linus. When it came to iomap, he explicitly listed the issues he had with it, and said until they get fixed, it's not an option that's on the table. and He didn't accuse everyone of that, he accused a couple of people of things they were doing. When someone gives a "No." and you ask "Why" when you get ghosted, that is understandably very aggravating.

                  Yes, he did bypass the correct channels, Now with linux-next, I have seen multiple kernel developers now on various channels criticizing the inclusion processes. This is not just a "Kent did bad" situation evidently.

                  as for the VFS stuff, I'm not entirely sure whats going on with this, the VFS patch that bcache posted did get ack. Kent has been non stop asking for more information and correspondance and then one getting ghosted, yes, he certainly was out of line at times, but pretending that no one else was is just a blantant and shitty attack against kent

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                    I don't like this sort of communication I don't know all the maintainers communication how fast they responded if they answered all questions or reasoned for their blocks or anything but just going by the mail from Linus this is super toxic by him:

                    1. he said you should have done A and B, he does not say if you do A or B in time we add it, so it's just 2 hoops to spring through with a open amount of additional hoops is it then enough are there 2 5 5000 other hoops?
                    That is not the truth.

                    Linux kernel patch submit policy

                    This policy predates first line of bcache being written.

                    He is not being asked to additional hoops. Instead in reality he been asked todo hoops that have been documented for over 20 years. So yes Linus saying he should have done them is true.

                    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                    2. he somewhat admitted that he did not notice that the code is not in linux-next, but it's more like "ok I don't blame you for it" not that "if I would have noticed I would not have caused you to not get added now".
                    Linus did not notice but "Christian Brauner" one of the overall maintainers of all file system drivers did notice and told Kent to put his code up linux-next months ago back in July once and 4 times in june. Kent Overstreet presumed he knew better.

                    Please note Kent Oversteet managed to piss Christian Brauner off for not following instructions include the instruction to send the code to Linux-next branch.

                    The reality here is if Kent Oversteet had obeyed instructions back in June/July the bcachefs code would most likely being merged right now. But hey he was smart than the average bear and decide to go over Christian Brauner head and go straight to Linus Torvalds. Once the code is merged into linux-next branch expect to see Christian Brauner comment.

                    Kent Overstreet is trying to play victim here but in reality he had directions he decided not to follow them.


                    The linux-next tree is the holding area for patches aimed at the next kernel merge window. If you're doing bleeding edge kernel development, you may want to work from that tree rather than Linus Torvalds' mainline tree.​
                    Remember bcachefs misses the merge window in July because is not classed as ready. The Linux-next tree is for all patches wanting to be in the next merge window. Like ir not first step is passing the patch checklist second step get code placed in the linux-next tree third step getting accepted by Linux. Reality Kent Overstreet has attempted to skip 2 of these.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                      Sorry the uncultured english speaking world did not clip that apparently:


                      The only english reference about this seems to be about witcher, but meh
                      oh, that's a great example of kafkaesque bureaucracy, and another bonus point for the Asterix and Obelix!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X