From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) by mail19.linbit.com (LINBIT Mail Daemon) with ESMTP id 89442160870 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2026 08:40:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2026 23:40:42 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/20] DRBD 9 rework Message-ID: References: <20260327223820.2244227-1-christoph.boehmwalder@linbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Philipp Reisner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Lars Ellenberg , drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com List-Id: "*Coordination* of development, patches, contributions -- *Questions* \(even to developers\) go to drbd-user, please." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , First an apology, I thought it was in your tree, but it looks like the drbd branch just has minor fixes. So a lot less urgency. On Wed, Apr 08, 2026 at 06:58:58AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > See the previous discussion, Do you have a pointer to that discussion? I can't remember one. > the goal is to sync the two drbd code > bases. It's followed the "usual" pattern of the in-kernel driver being > neglected and development and users pushed to the out-of-tree one, > which is highly annoying. I don't think that's a a usual pattern. Also the new version looks like a complete rewrite and not something incremental: 45 files changed, 45891 insertions(+), 16264 deletions(-) For a code base that is "29482 total". I think reviewing it would be easier by just adding an new drbd9 driver and then steering people toward it carefully, as that is actually reviewable compared to non-bisectable patches changing large chunks of code in a non-atomic way.