From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francis Moreau Subject: Re: Issue (as expected) when upgrading from 3.12 to 3.13.7 Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 08:51:46 +0200 Message-ID: <533A6202.4020207@gmail.com> References: <5338DF1B.9080002@kieser.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f176.google.com ([209.85.212.176]:33790 "EHLO mail-wi0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751171AbaDAGuc (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2014 02:50:32 -0400 Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id r20so4495952wiv.9 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 23:50:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5338DF1B.9080002@kieser.ca> Sender: linux-bcache-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Kieser , linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org On 03/31/2014 05:20 AM, Peter Kieser wrote: > > On 2014-03-30 3:53 AM, Francis Moreau wrote: >> That's just sad to see how unstable was/is bcache sub system and I still >> don't understand why it was not marked as experimental. > > IMO, It should still be marked as experimental. Possibly, even removed > from mainline as the maintainer is not particularly responsive to major > bugs. Certainly not production ready and it's been through many releases > of the kernel now. Well, removing from mainline is quite extreme but moving it to the staging stuff would be a possible alternative. And it should definitely be marked experimental in stable trees such as 3.12 (LTS kernel) IMHO. Specially since those trees don't get any fixes.