On 10 Nov 2020, at 13:39, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
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.
I think APIs change based on the needs of the project. We do this all
the time in the kernel, and we don’t think twice about updating users
of the API as needed. The zstd changes look awkward and large today
because it’ a long time period, but we’ve all been pretty vocal in
the past about the importance of being able to advance APIs.
-chris
