On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 08:38:26AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 1/6/25 8:32 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 08:24:06AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > >> A lot more code where? > > > > Very good and relevant question. Some random new repo that no one knows > > about? Not very helpful. xfstests itself? Maybe, but that would just > > means other users have to fork it. > > Why would they have to fork it? Just put it in xfstests itself. These > are very weak reasons, imho. Because that way other users can't use it. Damien has already mentioned some. And someone would actually have to write that hypothetical thing. > >> Not in the kernel. And now we're stuck with a new > >> driver for a relatively niche use case. Seems like a bad tradeoff to me. > > > > Seriously, if you can't Damien and me to maintain a little driver > > using completely standard interfaces without any magic you'll have > > different problems keepign the block layer alive :) > > Asking "why do we need this driver, when we can accomplish the same with > existing stuff" There is no "existing stuff" > is a valid question, and I'm a bit puzzled why we can't > just have a reasonable discussion about this. I think this is a valid and reasonable discussion. But maybe we're just not on the same page. I don't know anything existing and usable, maybe I've just not found it?
