On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:01:41PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote: > You do consistently ask for a shim layer, but you haven???t explained what > we gain by diverging from the documented and tested API of the upstream zstd > project. It???s an important discussion given that we hope to regularly > update the kernel side as they make improvements in zstd. An API that looks like every other kernel API, and doesn't cause endless amount of churn because someone decided they need a new API flavor of the day. Btw, I'm not asking for a shim layer - that was the compromise we ended up with. If zstd folks can't maintain a sane code base maybe we should just drop this childish churning code base from the tree.
