Re: [Drbd-dev] [GIT PULL] drbd-8.4 for mainline

[Philipp Reisner <philipp.reisner@linbit.com>]

Am Mittwoch 24 August 2011, 19:02:20 schrieb Jens Axboe:
> On 2011-08-24 18:00, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:41, Philipp Reisner
> > 
> > <philipp.reisner@linbit.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Jens,
> >> 
> >> First the announcement of drbd-8.4, then the git pull-request text:
> >> 
> >> We are proud to announce the availability of DRBD-8.4.0.
> >> 
> >>  The most noticeable change is the support for multiple replicated
> >>  volumes in a single DRBD connection.
> >>  Write-ordering is obeyed among all writes in all volumes in a
> >>  single connection.
> >>  This feature is really important for users who DRBD for mirroring
> >>  over longer distances. (Protocol A).
> >> 
> >> We do not only release DRBD-8.4.0 today:
> >> The DRBD User's Guide was reviewed and updated to match DRBD-8.4.
> >> 
> >> I suggest to everybody who considers to upgrade from 8.3 to 8.4
> >> to have a look at the "Recent changes" appendix of the UG:
> >> http://www.drbd.org/users-guide/ap-recent-changes.html
> >> 
> >>  This release brings a new meta-data format. Forward (8.3 -> 8.4)
> >>  conversion happens complete seamless. Backward conversion
> >>  is done by a single command (drbdadm apply-al res).
> >>  
> >>  This release is protocol compatible with all it predecessor.
> >>  Although, we do not recommend to run it in 8.3 - 8.4 for long
> >>  time frames. We recommend to use that capability only for the
> >>  rolling upgrade.
> >>  
> >>  drbdadm of 8.4 can parse config files of 8.3. We recommend
> >>  to switch to the new configuration syntax after the upgrade
> >>  of both nodes. (Use drbdadm dump to learn about the new
> >>  config syntax)
> > 
> > Hm...
> > 
> > That's a lot of patches (including some protocol changes) that have not
> > yet been reviewed by other kernel developers.
> > 
> > By officially releasing the kernel and user-space bits and then posting
> > them to LKML and expecting them to be merged as-is, you are not really
> > following the linux kernel development process.
> > 
> > Some of the reverts and commit messages make me concerned that your
> > patch series has bisection issues; are you sure it compiles and runs
> > after every patch?
> > 
> > I'm obviously not anywhere in the maintenance chain for this code, but
> > it does look really funny.
> 
> That was my exact response a few weeks back, but I don't recall seeing
> anything until this email today. Philipp, has this been reviewed at all
> outside your internal group?

Yes, I requested review on LKML. See here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/8/179

Best,
 Phil