From: Geoffrey Wehrman <gwehrman@sgi.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] xfs: update mount options documentation
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 10:39:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130628153950.GA9164@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130628023204.GJ32195@dastard>
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:32:04PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
| On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:09:12PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
| > Mount options are perfectly fine to be removed - they've been given
| > deprecated warnings for quite some time now (the most recent is the
| > delaylog which has been doing that since 3.1 IIRC). So they are all
| > fine to actually remove - 12 months warning is usually considered
| > sufficient.
I hardly consider 12 years to be sufficient. I have no problem with
deprecating and disabling mount options so that they are ineffective,
but removing them so that an administrator gets an error when upgrading
his system is irresponsible product management, especially when it
requires almost no effort to keep the deprecated, disabled interface.
You move to newer kernels much faster than most people. Doesn't Red Hat
still support Red Hat 5? How old is that kernel? One of the reasons I
and others dread upgrading systems is because there are always
interfaces that change, always data conversions that have to be run,
always new processes to learn. I realize that XFS is still an evolving
filesystem, by historically one of its greatest achievements has been
that of backward compatibility. When XFS was ported from IRIX to Linux,
the same filesystem could be used without any conversion. Why force a
user to modify his fstab just because he has upgraded his kernel?
| > As to the sysctls - they haven't had any effect since 3.5 when the
| > xfsbufd was removed, so it's time to mark them deprecated so we can
| > remove them in a year's time. That gives anyone using them
| > (including distros) plenty of time to fix whatever is using them
| > before they get removed.
| >
| > > I'm thinking of the 3.3 glusterfs and 3.8 pulseaudio reakeage. And I would
| > > really like to have a nice holiday weekend. ;)
| >
| > I think you're being overly paranoid here - I'm simply following the
| > normal deprecation protocol here....
|
| Documenation/ABI/README:
|
| We have four different levels of ABI stability, as shown by the four
| different subdirectories in this location. Interfaces may change levels
| of stability according to the rules described below.
| ....
| obsolete/
| This directory documents interfaces that are still remaining in
| the kernel, but are marked to be removed at some later point in
| time. The description of the interface will document the reason
| why it is obsolete and when it can be expected to be removed.
| I think you'll find that what I done follows this policy. If you
| really want, I'll move them to Documenation/ABI/obsolete. And, of
| course, if removing them proves to be a problem, as Eric said we can
| always reinstate them or remove the deprecation notices.
It is great that Linux has a documented life cycle for kernel to userspace
interfaces. These are guidelines for the minimum requirements. Move the
mount options to obsolete. I have no problems with making mount options
obsolete. Remove them and people will make a big fuss.
--
Geoffrey Wehrman 651-683-5496 gwehrman@sgi.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-28 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-27 6:04 [PATCH 00/15] xfs: patchset for 3.11 Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 01/15] xfs: update mount options documentation Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 14:48 ` Ben Myers
2013-06-27 19:08 ` Ben Myers
2013-06-28 2:09 ` Dave Chinner
2013-06-28 2:32 ` Dave Chinner
2013-06-28 15:39 ` Geoffrey Wehrman [this message]
2013-06-28 16:49 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-06-28 19:58 ` Geoffrey Wehrman
2013-06-28 17:27 ` Ric Wheeler
2013-06-28 19:39 ` Ben Myers
2013-06-29 2:38 ` Dave Chinner
2013-06-28 2:18 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-06-28 20:46 ` Ben Myers
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 02/15] xfs: add pluging for bulkstat readahead Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 03/15] xfs: plug directory buffer readahead Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 04/15] xfs: don't use speculative prealloc for small files Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 05/15] xfs: don't do IO when creating an new inode Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 06/15] xfs: xfs_ifree doesn't need to modify the inode buffer Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 07/15] xfs: Introduce ordered log vector support Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 08/15] xfs: Introduce an ordered buffer item Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 09/15] xfs: Inode create log items Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 10/15] xfs: Inode create transaction reservations Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 11/15] xfs: Inode create item recovery Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 12/15] xfs: Use inode create transaction Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 13/15] xfs: remove local fork format handling from xfs_bmapi_write() Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 14/15] xfs: dquot log reservations are too small Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 14:38 ` Mark Tinguely
2013-06-28 17:18 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2013-06-29 2:42 ` Dave Chinner
2013-07-09 19:31 ` Ben Myers
2013-07-09 20:39 ` Dave Chinner
2013-07-09 20:42 ` Ben Myers
2013-06-27 6:04 ` [PATCH 15/15] xfs: implement inode change count Dave Chinner
2013-06-27 15:06 ` Mark Tinguely
2013-06-28 16:07 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2013-06-28 18:00 ` Ben Myers
2013-06-27 19:48 ` [PATCH 00/15] xfs: patchset for 3.11 Ben Myers
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=20130628153950.GA9164@sgi.com \
--to=gwehrman@sgi.com \
--cc=bpm@sgi.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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