Re: [RFC] MXFS: a shared-disk clustered filesystem derived from XFS

[Steve Shoecraft <spshoecraft@gmail.com>]

All good points and a nice snarky comment at the end - was a definite oversight that has been rectified.


> On Sep 29, 2026, at 11:00 AM, Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 09:19:39AM -0400, Steve Shoecraft wrote:
>> I’m disappointed in your responses. I would have thought that you’d at
>> least be interested in how well the AI did.
> 
> And I'm disappointed every time someone unfamiliar to the (xfs)
> community appears out of nowhere with a giant pile of code (LLM
> generated or otherwise) and a request that we read it.
> 
> If you want people to review your code, start by watching the mailing
> list for a month or two to familiarize yourself with community norms,
> and to ask questions when others post patches.
> 
>> It’s going to get better — not worse.
>> 
>> Since the initial 2-node TCP/DLM release (0.89.77 on September 23), Fable and Astra have completed 2-node CAW (0.90.7 on September 26), and 4-node TCP and CAW (0.90.24) have now been released on:
>> • Proxmox VE 9 (kernels 6.17 and 7.0)
>> • RHEL / AlmaLinux / Rocky 9.8
>> • Ubuntu 24.04 LTS (GA kernel 6.8)
>> • Debian 13 (kernel 6.12)
>> 
>> All are distributed as native DEB/RPM packages, with the kernel module built against the target kernel via DKMS.
>> 
>> The 0.90.24 release passed the complete release criteria: 4-node TCP 31/31, 4-node CAW 30/30, 2-node TCP 31/31, and 2-node CAW 30/30. All four platforms passed their packaged installation and validation runs.
>> 
>> The goal is full 32-node support for both TCP and CAW DLM.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The next project is OSN — a fully AI-written OS from scratch.
> 
> Good luck with that when you can't even be bothered to llmcode a test
> to make sure the magic numbers do not match standard xfs.
> 
> --D
> 
>>> On Sep 27, 2026, at 7:03 AM, Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Sep 26, 2026 at 07:32:27AM -0500, Steve Shoecraft wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Good catch on the magic - I had it changed in previous attempts and forgot on this one - release 0.90.0 has MXFS unique magic.
>>>> 
>>>> I’ve been writing device drivers since the 90s on FreeBSD.  This was a research project to see if an LLM could do it with the right harness.
>>>> 
>>>> Release conditions of course included 100% data integrity and 100% stability.   XFS was the right choice for the base.
>>>> 
>>>> Intent is a good clustered FS for Proxmox to compete with vSphere and VMFS.  Yes, I’m aware of the differences in implementations.
>>> 
>>> If you are not even bothering reviewing your own project source code as
>>> you stated, don't expect anybody else to spend their time or have
>>> interest on it.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sep 26, 2026, at 1:07 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don't think too many people are going to care about your LLM dump,
>>>>> or even review it.  But please make sure you use different magic numbers
>>>>> so that a mxfs image left in the wild is not mistaken for an xfs one.