From: Martin Steigerwald <martin@lichtvoll.de>
To: "Kent Overstreet" <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"Malte Schröder" <malte.schroeder@tnxip.de>
Cc: linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs changes for 6.17
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2025 16:27:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2235744.irdbgypaU6@lichtvoll.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f4be82e7-d98c-44d1-a65b-8c4302574fff@tnxip.de>
Hi.
Malte Schröder - 05.08.25, 23:19:21 CEST:
> So, no merge yet? That really is a bummer. I was really hoping to
> finally be able to run mainline Linux again on my boxes (yes, I
> converted all of them to bcachefs early this year), now that pretty much
> all issues I was hitting are fixed by this merge request.
Thanks, that is great to know.
> I mean, at the rate Kent's tree is stabilizing right now I am actually
> considering moving some productive systems over there. But those will
> need to run distro kernels. So, please merge, I don't want to jump
> through the hoops to run OpenZFS ...
I did not agree to some of your behavior before, Kent. But actually at
least from your description I had the feeling this pull request is about
stabilizing BCacheFS in order to remove the experimental tag. The pull
request looked quite reasonable to me.
And frankly I am using BCacheFS in production meanwhile, even with
encryption: On a 4 TB XS-2000 external SSD and I am quite sure I am not
willing to copy over all that data to a different filesystem again. And on
a scratch filesystem on my laptop, but that one is easily replaceable.
Sure I can switch to a different kernel source tree, having compiled
BCacheFS tools myself as well. And I am fine to do so.
But on the other hand, Linus, on a past rc1 pull request that does not
only contain bug fixes, there is still the option to simply not pull it.
After the discussion that has been had, even not pulling it without
explaining it sounds absolutely fair enough to me. It is not that someone
could force you to accept a pull request as far as I understand.
Well, maybe that is the strategy here: Just pull this at the last day of
the 2-week window to make sure everything else after that can only contain
bug fixes anymore. :)
So my two cents… I'd appreciate BCacheFS to stay in kernel. I bet the
churn to remove it and later again reintroduce it would be actually more
work than to simply ignore a pull request every now and then.
And I think I may not be the only BCacheFS user who prefers to use
mainline kernels.
Maybe at one conference you could come together in a room and sort this
all out face to face. But until then maybe the approach I outlined above
can be an option?
Best,
--
Martin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-07 14:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-28 15:14 [GIT PULL] bcachefs changes for 6.17 Kent Overstreet
2025-08-05 21:19 ` Malte Schröder
2025-08-05 22:41 ` Carl E. Thompson
2025-08-07 12:42 ` Aquinas Admin
2025-08-09 17:36 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-09 19:21 ` Josef Bacik
2025-08-09 20:37 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-09 21:34 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-10 2:24 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-08-10 3:17 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-10 4:05 ` Sasha Levin
2025-08-10 4:13 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-10 4:26 ` Gerald B. Cox
2025-08-10 5:17 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-10 5:59 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-08-10 6:51 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-10 10:22 ` Martin Steigerwald
2025-08-11 15:48 ` Peanut gallery 2c James Lawrence
2025-08-11 16:08 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-11 17:00 ` James Lawrence
[not found] ` <aJsIOj6jbPKayO0s@mayhem.fritz.box>
2025-08-12 16:26 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-11 16:48 ` [GIT PULL] bcachefs changes for 6.17 Aquinas Admin
2025-08-10 8:02 ` Martin Steigerwald
2025-08-10 6:05 ` Carl E. Thompson
2025-08-11 16:02 ` Aquinas Admin
2025-08-11 16:09 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-09 23:01 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-09 23:13 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-12 7:49 ` Jani Partanen
2025-08-12 10:09 ` Martin Steigerwald
2025-08-11 9:51 ` Konstantin Shelekhin
2025-08-11 14:26 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-11 18:13 ` Carl E. Thompson
2025-08-11 18:40 ` Malte Schröder
2025-08-12 0:44 ` Carl E. Thompson
2025-08-11 18:48 ` Aquinas Admin
2025-08-11 19:42 ` Martin Steigerwald
2025-08-11 21:04 ` Konstantin Shelekhin
2025-08-12 1:08 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-12 6:52 ` asdx
2025-08-12 7:04 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-12 7:17 ` asdx
2025-08-12 19:35 ` Keith Busch
2025-08-12 20:03 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-12 20:30 ` Keith Busch
2025-08-12 20:31 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-12 20:38 ` Keith Busch
2025-08-12 20:45 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-12 20:54 ` Keith Busch
2025-08-12 20:57 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-08-11 16:45 ` Aquinas Admin
2025-08-10 4:29 ` Gerhard Wiesinger
2025-08-07 14:27 ` Martin Steigerwald [this message]
2025-08-07 17:29 ` Peter Schneider
2025-08-10 6:20 ` Gerhard Wiesinger
2025-08-10 10:32 ` Martin Steigerwald
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2235744.irdbgypaU6@lichtvoll.de \
--to=martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=malte.schroeder@tnxip.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox