From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A1CC3ED5C6 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2026 16:16:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773937022; cv=none; b=Bn/KIMXJCV50d0n9OVLWSne3nzkWdSIYmqaTWU5VovRursEXugPY9r0S0/AYYV0AFeJORKzclimzOSpBdLzq7ADiq2/H7IuBnLoU5ECij4td+76GRBYJS13DztVD5Pf1yUxKBRZlpHsAuOLwUH+XQ0TbZGrhoIdeT+CkkyuF3ks= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773937022; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NFunWSO+VSZTwYNfXCiNilKXFoeZ+uy/5BIhyaLkaW0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=QOmNZU/kbFiKnfujIWJ0HN+eN/Ju7JEN3TP0gUVS5SVHPLcJYk7haER4SNb6aikS8MuN+9kH2Xc6X28ZCjC8d6Mdc8l4wczrDc9jfOJTeQzfitx0qcE7z3zPWdLPyo5mt4VScjOsUJx/TYnJoXGsYKZwBd14oaHKi96X4CH9ZVw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=tF6/iWos; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="tF6/iWos" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=KFJ0oFu6V09nh/SllpDZ2DjkxhLxKMr+gGZSzCnqtf4=; b=tF6/iWosJz+255slWZWWr4K0ey gmNH7YkAG9mqYxvcQvxZvdKHMnfPkWJaESgUrq/XL743SfxhX0zsxkRnm/N/Xk8LWaWN6/nnomfyI PkUEAIQ2jRb5OVIZp9FOpqw87NOu1kXNmcqCsErC0Z+3OP8Xzn0Zc/vKQlyMSVIOKS29thj4Y6uIH x/fBNJWL5lQTR42ufr+9xMcxhUqTVFxQXgXtYOcE6zOj3r/e0h6osxXMt2zbqj89FuMFgUiS8SYfj 7TY+rDOlzSswqJvoyi25/V6JsnoVHtx9jdyVvPxO2WhDFz15N0lHPky2YbzciUqByItjdhV7xDiHb MnjNDVKg==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1w3G3I-0000000B3Bt-1xiX; Thu, 19 Mar 2026 16:16:52 +0000 Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 09:16:52 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Fabio Fantoni Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, Christoph Hellwig , Sergei Shtepa Subject: Re: blksnap: no feedback received on latest patchset - any concerns? Message-ID: References: <5459ee8c-075f-453f-8999-19219f9a6fdc@tiscali.it> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <5459ee8c-075f-453f-8999-19219f9a6fdc@tiscali.it> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Hi Fabio, a 2 year old patchset has been paged out of everyones mind. I still think functionality like it would be useful, but it needs to be resend to get fresh eyes. On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 01:06:10PM +0100, Fabio Fantoni wrote: > Hi Jens, hi all, > > The blksnap v7 patchset was posted in February 2024 and has received no > response so far. As someone who has followed this project closely, I wanted > to ask directly: is there a reason this patchset is not being considered? > > This is a module for non-persistent block device snapshots, useful for > backup on filesystems like ext4 that don't have their own snapshot > mechanism. It went through 7 revision cycles with review of some people and > substantial contributions from Christoph Hellwig. The amount of work that > Sergei Shtepa and Christoph put into this has been remarkable. > > The silence after v7 seems to have led the developer to abandon the upstream > effort entirely, which is unfortunate because seems to me there's still a > need for a block-level snapshot capabilities module integrated upstream, or > am I wrong? > > I fully understand if there are technical objections, but could you please > share what they are? Even a definitive rejection, accompanied by clear > reasoning, would help the community understand whether it’s better to take a > different approach or address specific concerns in similar cases. > > Thank you for your time. > ---end quoted text---