Jens, my intention is to keep it in-tree, and at some point update it. Regarding your questions: [...] > - Why aren't the drbd maintainers responding to posted patches? They seem > to simply be ignored, and I'm left to pickup the trivial ones that look > fine to me. In-kernel drbd appears largely unmaintained, and has been for > years. The team here has grown, we are busy. Since you started to pick up the trivial patches yourself, I thought it is not necessary that I collect them and send a pull request in merge-window time. > - Even if out-of-band communication is used for in-kernel users of drbd, > that doesn't result in any patches or fixes that should go upstream? This one: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-block/patch/20210426163032.3454129-1-christoph.boehmwalder@xxxxxxxxxx/ (relevant to users that have DRBD on top of md raid) > - If there's zero activity for in-kernel drbd, all users are using the > out-of-tree version? There are users of the in-tree version, some with huge fleets. Some do not need the newer out-of-tree DRBD, and the in-tree version is a lot easier to compile. You need coccinelle for the out-of-tree version, and that can already be a hindering barrier for some. > As far as I can tell, drbd upstream is stone cold dead, and has been for > years. Why shouldn't it just get removed? Because there are users. > Is it just bait to get people to use an out-of-tree version? No. > -- > Jens Axboe
