From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mta-201a.earthlink-vadesecure.net (mta-201a.earthlink-vadesecure.net [51.81.229.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 294B352F28B; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 15:13:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=51.81.229.180 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790694830; cv=none; b=F4bWhsq6UpT8AG6q9FQMJdXVkL0B0nsdqfilUxw8a1n2jAQ/iJ2WwCg8KDCsp8p4zJoWTuR5jqR9l/1vEfdQSVs+eKm7Sf/se87p5Bnv8jtRiUhibr8yLpoDfAu+2Yd+ix4MUKmbp8kMwmrq5Q/khfWJfWkxFLGLrO+c/KueCDI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790694830; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7dljAa4C1wt6iVIQTOKsMI8D3vH3A4sVO+d/NbxzvkE=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=GI7wEl8nYrmgPHYLzRVJ5z2ZLGVQGA7vsYtaY2qkJ5yvUkKruXvFWB07opz1cQADpic0+ckJH9l1Y3lhuxt+pV/SLLgMz0DaJmygHwyzfvhrtFRdFXvOPUaN54KvGfuEbs+zJsIneJpGofLzC+e98Sh3K+B9KZXt5mkCpDRwOaA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=earthlink.net header.i=@earthlink.net header.b=gcch53KU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=51.81.229.180 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=earthlink.net header.i=@earthlink.net header.b="gcch53KU" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; bh=b7XBLzCH56VpIGuehNu0uRprj6RKU43lZEumxo FtC18=; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=earthlink.net; h=from:reply-to:subject: date:to:cc:resent-date:resent-from:resent-to:resent-cc:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe:list-unsubscribe-post: list-subscribe:list-post:list-owner:list-archive; q=dns/txt; s=dk12062016; t=1790694490; x=1791299290; b=gcch53KU/lTwIX6bgy7aVVIZjoP qfanj5YRzE8H/C0317zpX2jZGHEf/0oC2XK9HA9Z8UTgQwfsNm+RycoITm5d8y8GbgTggt5 bkEnSY/yrJhUgbGvJA9j+71eJE6Z4j/gHy+2GYusGk9LCMkNB+zGOClS9K9xM7L+iLmapuZ RcVeEGNc2wD37cmPi1tJsoZlf+ZjSuSx81sGSFE+BwTTQGxf0RwQeMbR+yjvmkQh19fh2Kn JvNKmhtZjLt8nb7y881Sbjvtcwylbxi0wcCdJF8pdJFK3sUso1MOSsc9xYz/jQ6F2dwd+mS iGUOra+ecn3qsMqDvoR7v7Pj6zl3L3A== Received: from smtpclient.apple ([98.27.167.98]) by vsel2nmtao01p.internal.vadesecure.com with ngmta id 235b0cd9-18d9d325ed35a566; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 15:08:10 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3864.700.51.1.1\)) Subject: Re: [RFC] MXFS: a shared-disk clustered filesystem derived from XFS From: Steve Shoecraft In-Reply-To: <20260929150056.GG6244@frogsfrogsfrogs> Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 11:07:54 -0400 Cc: Carlos Maiolino , Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9E7E7E56-7F4F-4F0E-A971-2FEB93CB82FC@gmail.com> References: <56847E8D-EA83-4984-82F3-9BC93E4C02FF@gmail.com> <1B01BE22-06A8-412D-B141-CD94026E0A39@gmail.com> <20260929150056.GG6244@frogsfrogsfrogs> To: "Darrick J. Wong" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3864.700.51.1.1) 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=E2=80=AFAM, Darrick J. Wong = wrote: >=20 > On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 09:19:39AM -0400, Steve Shoecraft wrote: >> I=E2=80=99m disappointed in your responses. I would have thought that = you=E2=80=99d at >> least be interested in how well the AI did. >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 >> It=E2=80=99s going to get better =E2=80=94 not worse. >>=20 >> 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: >> =E2=80=A2 Proxmox VE 9 (kernels 6.17 and 7.0) >> =E2=80=A2 RHEL / AlmaLinux / Rocky 9.8 >> =E2=80=A2 Ubuntu 24.04 LTS (GA kernel 6.8) >> =E2=80=A2 Debian 13 (kernel 6.12) >>=20 >> All are distributed as native DEB/RPM packages, with the kernel = module built against the target kernel via DKMS. >>=20 >> 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. >>=20 >> The goal is full 32-node support for both TCP and CAW DLM. >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> The next project is OSN =E2=80=94 a fully AI-written OS from scratch. >=20 > 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. >=20 > --D >=20 >>> On Sep 27, 2026, at 7:03=E2=80=AFAM, Carlos Maiolino = wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Sat, Sep 26, 2026 at 07:32:27AM -0500, Steve Shoecraft wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> 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. >>>>=20 >>>> I=E2=80=99ve 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. >>>>=20 >>>> Release conditions of course included 100% data integrity and 100% = stability. XFS was the right choice for the base. >>>>=20 >>>> Intent is a good clustered FS for Proxmox to compete with vSphere = and VMFS. Yes, I=E2=80=99m aware of the differences in implementations. >>>=20 >>> 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. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>> On Sep 26, 2026, at 1:07=E2=80=AFAM, Christoph Hellwig = wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> 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.