On 2019/6/18 15:05, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 02:52:21PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: >> >> >> On 2019/6/18 14:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 02:18:00PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2019/6/18 13:47, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:47:08AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2019/6/18 4:36, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 02:16:11AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: >>>>>>>> At last, this is RFC patch v1, which means it is not suitable for >>>>>>>> merging soon... I'm still working on it, testing its stability >>>>>>>> these days and hope these patches get merged for 5.3 LTS >>>>>>>> (if 5.3 is a LTS version). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why would 5.3 be a LTS kernel? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> curious as to how you came up with that :) >>>>>> >>>>>> My personal thought is about one LTS kernel one year... >>>>>> Usually 5 versions after the previous kernel...(4.4 -> 4.9 -> 4.14 -> 4.19), >>>>>> which is not suitable for all historical LTSs...just prepare for 5.3... >>>>> >>>>> I try to pick the "last" kernel that is released each year, which >>>>> sometimes is 5 kernels, sometimes 4, sometimes 6, depending on the >>>>> release cycle. >>>>> >>>>> So odds are it will be 5.4 for the next LTS kernel, but we will not know >>>>> more until it gets closer to release time. >>>> >>>> Thanks for kindly explanation :) >>>> >>>> Anyway, I will test these patches, land to our commerical products and try the best >>>> efforts on making it more stable for Linux upstream to merge. >>> >>> Sounds great. >>> >>> But why do you need to add compression to get this code out of staging? >>> Why not move it out now and then add compression and other new features >>> to it then? >> >> Move out of staging could be over several linux versions since I'd like to get >> majority fs people agreed to this. > > You never know until you try :) Thanks for your encouragement :) Actually, I personally gave a brief talk on this year LSF/MM 2019 but since I cannot speak English well so the entire effect is not good enough :(... I will personally contact with important people ... to get their agreements on this file system soon. > >> Decompression inplace is an important part of erofs to show its performance >> benefits over existed compress filesystems and I tend to merge it in advance. > > There is no requirement to show benefits over other filesystems in order > to get it merged, but I understand the feeling. That's fine, we can > wait, we are not going anywhere... Thanks again. I am just proving that the erofs solution may be one of the best compression solutions in performance first scenerio :) Thanks, Gao Xiang > > thanks, > > greg k-h >
