On 14.07.2021 16:51, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 12:50:08PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
Hi Alexander,
On 13.07.2021 22:14, Al Viro wrote:
To elaborate a bit - there's one case when I want it to go through
vfs.git, and that's when there's an interference between something
going on in vfs.git and the work done in filesystem. Other than
that, I'm perfectly fine with maintainer sending pull request directly
to Linus (provided that I hadn't spotted something obviously wrong
in the series, of course, but that's not "I want it to go through
vfs.git" - that's "I don't want it in mainline until such and such
bug is resolved").
let me take this opportunity to ask about another filesystem.
Would you advise to send pull req for the fs/ntfs3 directly to Linus?
That is a pending filesystem that happens to be highly expected by many
Linux focused communities.
Paragon Software GmbH proved it's commitment by sending as many as 26
versions on it's patchset. The last set was send early April:
[PATCH v26 00/10] NTFS read-write driver GPL implementation by Paragon Software
https://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=161738417018673&q=mbox
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-fsdevel/list/?series=460291
I'd say there weren't any serious issues raised since then.
One Tested-by, one maintenance question, one remainder, one clang-12
issue [0] [1].
It seems this filesystem only needs:
1. [Requirement] Adjusting to the meanwhile changed iov API [2]
2. [Clean up] Using fs/iomap/ helpers [3]
Why haven't those things been done and the patches resubmitted for
review? Nothing we can do from our side when the developers don't want
to submit a new series, right?
The real issue (broken compilation) has been pointed out 2 days ago and
is a result of a more recent commit. For months filesystem could be
pushed but it wasn't for unknown reason.
As for fs/iomap/ helpers it's unclear to me if that is really required
or could be worked on later as a clean up. Darrick joked his opinion on
using those helper is biased.
In short I'd say: missing feedback.
