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
next prev parent 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