The VFS hot tracking debacle

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.kernel <at> gmail.com> writes:

> 
> Ping ^ 7
> 


I'm following this patch now for quite some time and I have to say that this
thread+patch is one of the most disappointing experiences I had with kernel
development.

I can't understand why such a patch is simply ignored from the maintainers
of the subsystem, no comment, no review, no checkin.

If you would at least give a explanation why it is a bad idea to have hot
data on fast drives or the general approach is simply bad or there are some
quirks in the code that needs to be fixed - then alright.
But ignoring a patch like this that will make many people happy is not
understandable form my perspective and the only explanation I can think of
is some bad intention or a conflict with a employer...

This patch story is just disappointing.

Zhi Yong Wu, thanks for the great patch.


kind regards
 Daniel


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux