From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] overlayfs fixes for 4.9-rc3
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 10:41:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwseoebvgSvi8sHswESOGnLknh+d6_aYAknwPFQbtp7hg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxjsfAwpvKj1PXvR+_DWKm0HxF7sn1j7QfTzXWquvvXvTQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Can you please clarify your objection?
There are several:
- timing. No way in hell will I take a new feature like this during an rc
- lack of explanation. Why is this bad feature needed in the first
place? Why would overlayfs versioning _ever_ be a good idea?
- is the implementation even sane? Right now I don't think overlayfs
even requires xattr support in the upper filesystem, so the whole
concept seems frankly totally misdesigned.
> I suppose you do not object to the concept of on-disk format version nor on-disk
> format compatible/incompatible features sets.
I object both to the concept and to the implementation and to the
timing. The thing seems broken. Doing it during the rc cycle makes it
doubly so.
> Just to fact that overlayfs didn't have those form day one, so it
> should find a way to cope with that situation without patching
> stable kernels?
What "situation"? There's no f*cking explanation of why we'd even want
this crap. Not in the commit message, not in the pull request, not
*anywhere*.
And then the commit marks that shit for stable? When it clearly
doesn't fix anything, and it has never ever been needed before?
NO.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-05 17:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-04 9:30 [GIT PULL] overlayfs fixes for 4.9-rc3 Miklos Szeredi
2016-11-05 3:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-11-05 6:44 ` Amir Goldstein
2016-11-05 17:41 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2016-11-05 19:45 ` Miklos Szeredi
2016-11-05 21:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-11-05 21:41 ` Peter Rosin
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=CA+55aFwseoebvgSvi8sHswESOGnLknh+d6_aYAknwPFQbtp7hg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).