public inbox for linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Bob Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	swhiteho@redhat.com, cluster-devel@redhat.com,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: gfs2: Adding new return type vm_fault_t
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 12:08:52 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180417020852.GI5572@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFqt6zYQ=M89gRFK2TOS+nm-3XG+9BJxZ7ckXw5zC=n3adSn5g@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:20:59PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This patch is straightforward enough, but there are a lot of other
> > file systems that need similar patches. Shouldn't you do one big
> > patch set that fixes several file systems at once and run it through
> > Viro's kernel or Linus's kernel or something?
> > Adding Viro and linux-fsdevel for more opinions.
> 
> The plan for these patches is to introduce the typedef, initially just
> as documentation ("These functions should return a VM_FAULT_ status").
> We'll trickle the patches to individual drivers/filesystems in through
> the maintainers, as far as possible.  Then we'll change the typedef to
> an unsigned int and break the compilation of any unconverted
> drivers/filesystems.
>
> We have already started sending out drivers/filesystems changes
> to different maintainers.

Yes, we can see that. The response you are getting is "this is not
how we do cross-subsystem API changes.  Why are you doing it this
way?"

i.e. the problem being pointed out is that your process has not
followed the correct/normal process for proposing, reviewing and
mering cross-subsystem API changes. Bob has raised the same
questions as both Christoph and Darrick have asked in response to
the XFS patch. I only implied these questions by asking about
introducing useless typedefs with no context for reviewers...

I'd really like to have Darrick's questions answered(*) in a
constructive, non-abusive manner - I'll quote it here to get it all
in one thread on -fsdevel:

| ...hm, the original mm patch wasn't cc'd to fsdevel either, so that's
| probably why I never heard of any of this until now.
|
| So, uh, why wasn't this whole series (all the mm changes and all the
| required fs changes) sent out for review prior to the merge window?

We're not asking for a description of what you are doing - we are
asking why the normal processes for proposing and merging such a
change is not being followed, and how you plan to rectify that.

Cheers,

Dave.

https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=152389824107375&w=2
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

      reply	other threads:[~2018-04-17  2:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20180414194155.GA20021@jordon-HP-15-Notebook-PC>
2018-04-16 16:58 ` [PATCH] fs: gfs2: Adding new return type vm_fault_t Bob Peterson
2018-04-16 17:50   ` Souptick Joarder
2018-04-17  2:08     ` Dave Chinner [this message]

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=20180417020852.GI5572@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=cluster-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=jrdr.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rpeterso@redhat.com \
    --cc=swhiteho@redhat.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=willy@infradead.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