On Mon 06-03-23 10:17:56, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > On Sun, Mar 05, 2023 at 03:24:41PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > In fact, it was quite nice in a couple of ways: not only didn't I have > > a hugely compressed merge window where I felt I had to cram as much as > > possible into the first few days, but the fact that we _have_ had a > > couple of merge windows where I really asked for people to have > > everything ready when the merge window opened seems to have set a > > pattern: the bulk of everything really did come in early. > > > > Not so for me watching updates to ext4 merging hell... > > In this merge window, Ted only submitted the first part of ext4 updates > [1] as noted in the resolution message [2]. The second part didn't make > through the merge window (PR not sent). As such, the data=writepage > cleanups have to wait for 6.4 merge window, and it is IMO inconvenient > for linux-next to contain ext4 tree from next-20230217 for about > seven weeks, as any enhancements and fixes applied to the tree are > holding back from testing in linux-next until this hell can be sorted > out. > > In the long term, I'd like to see a co-maintainer step in to help > maintaining the tree in case Ted is busy. Of couse I'm not eligible > for that role (I played as documentation janitor instead), but > any developer with deep knowledge and experience for the fs and its > internals should fit the role. To be fair, the data=journal cleanups got held back only partially due to the merge issues. Another problem is that they somehow make problems with filesystem freezing in data=journal mode more frequent and we wanted to understand (and hopefully fix) that. Of course if Ted could look into this earlier or I could earlier debug these issues, we could have merged the cleanups but that's always the case that you have to prioritize and these cleanups don't have that high priority... Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
