Linux Btrfs filesystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zhang Boyang <zhangboyang.id@gmail.com>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>, Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>, Filipe Manana <fdmanana@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] two raid consistency bugs
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 18:41:25 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <130adcc1-75e2-4c14-8cfe-ef5b2719814e@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4674023f-1b70-4be4-ae0c-c65669901feb@gmx.com>

Hi,

On 2026/7/15 18:11, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> That's exactly what I'm doing. I'm not requesting devs to fix this bug 
>> immediately or implement my fancy idea. I wrote two test cases and 
>> hope it will be helpful to btrfs development. It would be better if 
>> these two test cases can be merged to test suite.
> 
> No, we will not push for test cases without a fix.
> 
> There is already a known failure, generic/747, and at least I'm not the 
> only one regretting pushing that.
> 

That's a strange policy. Is this a btrfs policy only or it applies to 
whole xfstests?

>>
>> I even wrote a draft patch to fix the second bug. However, the first 
>> bug is not easily solvable. So I had to discuss possible solutions. If 
>> possible, I would have written‌ a draft patch for the first bug, too.
> 
> This is already what I call fancy ideas.
> 
> Anyway, this will mostly just get yourself ignored if you really choose 
> to start from fancy projects.
> Those long existing problems are still there for a reason.
> 

Ok, the first bug is a bit fancy, but what about the second one? I don't 
think the second bug is hard to solve (if you ignore the first bug).

> If you believe you're smarter than everyone else, then go ahead, no one 
> is going to make you change your mind.
> 

This is a strange accusation‌ and I don't like your attitude. I never 
thought I am smarter than everyone else.


Zhang Boyang


  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-15 10:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-14 16:10 [BUG] two raid consistency bugs Zhang Boyang
2026-07-14 16:10 ` [PATCH 1/2] fstests: btrfs/348: test ambiguous generation handling on raid1 profile Zhang Boyang
2026-07-14 16:10 ` [PATCH 2/2] fstests: btrfs/349: test if latest tree-log is choosen at mount time " Zhang Boyang
2026-07-14 21:40 ` [BUG] two raid consistency bugs Qu Wenruo
2026-07-15  5:46   ` Zhang Boyang
2026-07-15  6:10     ` Qu Wenruo
2026-07-15  7:38       ` Zhang Boyang
2026-07-15  8:36         ` Qu Wenruo
2026-07-15  9:25           ` Zhang Boyang
2026-07-15  9:44             ` Qu Wenruo
2026-07-15 10:07               ` Zhang Boyang
2026-07-15 10:11                 ` Qu Wenruo
2026-07-15 10:41                   ` Zhang Boyang [this message]
2026-07-15 13:11                   ` Alan Huang

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=130adcc1-75e2-4c14-8cfe-ef5b2719814e@gmail.com \
    --to=zhangboyang.id@gmail.com \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.com \
    --cc=fdmanana@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
    --cc=wqu@suse.com \
    /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