From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30630C04AAF for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 16:57:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=B5zucAFR; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=TEI3317K; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4RrPq95zXLz3cBQ for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2023 02:57:57 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=B5zucAFR; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=TEI3317K; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=195.135.220.29; helo=smtp-out2.suse.de; envelope-from=jack@suse.cz; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4RrPp82stNz3c4V for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2023 02:57:03 +1000 (AEST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54B642017D; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 16:57:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1695229020; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=arrJUNtqjU/izONia38ns6kqz5a2Ljs8vzyYYK7Z784=; b=B5zucAFR4XyR8/5tRFN24icRoW3Li46w9AYROy5fgeQHJjHHmWe1VBSTJAgJzltxBUTQfj A2xO9YmlmCUAHIhnO6bcsmBlTch94Tqw9Zrs2J99gUVXgRrg7N5SnwIhK/ADmsG7DqDXb5 NyDsDzox8Vmqa0S6njAX9jt6GCL7qPo= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1695229020; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=arrJUNtqjU/izONia38ns6kqz5a2Ljs8vzyYYK7Z784=; b=TEI3317KDo5yb9aq6yYTvDHKSUd5zcn5XGrWvmgB48JFj1/RVX24vTZ5l0fScD+mlAMJpN CaN28xdVs9HUPMBA== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 420581333E; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 16:57:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id s1QXEFwkC2UDdgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Wed, 20 Sep 2023 16:57:00 +0000 Received: by quack3.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AE8E8A077D; Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:56:59 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:56:59 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Geert Uytterhoeven Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] arch/*: config: Remove ReiserFS from defconfig Message-ID: <20230920165659.coe7d2lydiaatoby@quack3> References: <20230918175529.19011-1-peter@n8pjl.ca> <20230918234108.GN19790@gate.crashing.org> <20230919000026.7409-1-peter@n8pjl.ca> <20230919151630.GO19790@gate.crashing.org> <20230919155832.4179-1-peter@n8pjl.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, tsbogend@alpha.franken.de, jack@suse.cz, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, richard.henderson@linaro.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, richard@nod.at, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru, Peter Lafreniere , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk, johannes@sipsolutions.net, reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Tue 19-09-23 18:02:39, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Peter, > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 5:58 PM Peter Lafreniere wrote: > > 2) Stops building an obsolete and largely-unused filesystem unnecessarily. > > Some hobbyist targets like m68k and alpha may prefer to keep all filesystems > > available until total removal, but others like arm and UML have no need for > > ReiserFS to be built unless specifically configured. > > As UML is used a lot for testing, isn't it actually counter-productive > to remove ReiserFS from the UML defconfig? The less testing it > receives, the higher the chance of introducing regressions. The only testing I know about for reiserfs (besides build testing) is syzbot. And regarding the people / bots doing filesystem testing I know none of them uses UML. Rather it is x86 VMs these days where reiserfs is disabled in the defconfig for a *long* time (many years). Also when you do filesystem testing, you usually just test the few filesystems you care about and for which you have all the tools installed. So frankly I don't see a good reason to leave reiserfs enabled in defconfigs. But sure if m68k or other arch wants to keep reiserfs in it's defconfig for some consistency reasons, I'm fine with it. I just suspect that for most archs this is just a historical reason. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR