Re: [PATCH 0/2] dm: add new loop and ram targets

[Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Jan 18 2018 at  6:56am -0500,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 18 2018 at  6:42am -0500,
> Bryn M. Reeves <bmr@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 04:29:36PM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 17 2018 at  2:33pm -0500,
> > > As for dm-loop, doubling the performance of the loopback driver is quite
> > > nice (especially with only 1/7 the number of lines of code as
> > > drives/block/loop.c).
> > 
> > Isn't this going to raise the same objection that akpm had years ago,
> > with the original dm-loop (block mapping) target?
> > 
> > We had an even bigger performance boost with that but it was rejected
> > on the grounds that a second loop back block device implementation was
> > not welcome unless the two could share code.
> 
> Could.  But I wasn't around for that particular spat.  It seems quite
> misplaced to swoop in with an aire of design purity to defeat a DM
> target that shows such clear wins.
> 
> This idea that our poor Linux users will lose their heads because they
> have multiple options is also idiotic.
> 
> But we'll cross that bridge as needed (before burning it down?) ;)

Reflecting on getting spun up about the potential for a fight made me
feel like this guy wanting to use the phone in "Dumb and Dumber":
https://youtu.be/Gue2LvHibpg?t=25

Could easily be in the end someone like akpm or Jens will just
effectively punch me in the face from inside their phone booth ;)