Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] btrfs-progs: lowmem: delay before lowmem repair

["Su Yue" <Damenly_Su@gmx.com>]

> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2018 at 5:43 PM
> From: "Nikolay Borisov" <nborisov@suse.com>
> To: "Su Yue" <suy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] btrfs-progs: lowmem: delay before lowmem repair
>
> 
> 
> On  2.07.2018 12:28, Su Yue wrote:
> > Since lowmem repair is dangerous, it should remind user more obviously.
> > The patchset add 10 seconds delay like btrfs balance and add am option
> > '--force-repair-lowmem' to skip the delay.
> 
> IMO this is the wrong way to approach a dangerous option. If it's so
> dangerous it needs to be written in the documentation explicitly this is
> so. If someone wants to use lowmem then they should explicitly set
> --mode lowmem. So I'm inclined to NACK this patch.
> 
OK. After some considerations, I thinks the patchset is indeed appropriate.
Droping it is fine.

Thanks,
Su
> > 
> > ---
> > I don't whether it's a good idea to add delay and the option only for
> > lowmem repair is acceptable, so make it RFC.
> > 
> > Su Yue (3):
> >   btrfs-progs: lowmem: delay before lowmem repair starts
> >   btrfs-progs: lowmem: force to start without delay with option
> >     '--force-repair-lowmem'
> >   btrfs-progs: tests: append '--force-repair-lowmem' if lowmem repair is
> >     enabled
> > 
> >  check/main.c       | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >  tests/common.local |  1 +
> >  2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>