On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 04:16:34PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 10:54:56AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the bcachefs tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > ERROR: modpost: missing MODULE_LICENSE() in lib/thread_with_file.o
> > ERROR: modpost: "stdio_redirect_vprintf" [fs/bcachefs/bcachefs.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "thread_with_file_exit" [fs/bcachefs/bcachefs.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "run_thread_with_stdio" [fs/bcachefs/bcachefs.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "__darray_resize_slowpath" [fs/bcachefs/bcachefs.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "stdio_redirect_readline" [fs/bcachefs/bcachefs.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "run_thread_with_file" [fs/bcachefs/bcachefs.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "__darray_resize_slowpath" [lib/thread_with_file.ko] undefined!
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > f894f9e5f0ad ("thread_with_file: Lift from bcachefs")
> >
> > I have used the version of bcachefs from next-20240206 again.
>
> I've mentioned this before, but this patch (and I assume others) was not
> posted to any mailing list before it appeared in -next. This process
> failure really needs to be fixed. Please post _everything_ going into
> your tree to at least linux-bcachefs mailing list, and for things that
> toss stuff into lib/ it really needs to go to lkml too and CCed to some
> subset of people who have touched lib/Kconfig, etc last.
thread_wih_file definitely was; the patch moving it to lib/ might not
have, I'd have to check.
We're having ongoing discussions among us fs developers about how to do
patch review, and the emerging consensus seems to be that we actually
don't want to spam the list with every patch (because not every patch is
interesting!) - we don't want the human-to-human interaction to be
drowned out on the list.
That doesn't mean we're not doing code review, though! We're
experimenting with different workflows, there's different thoughts out
there right now.
Regarding CCing people who have touched lib/Kconfig - you sure that's
the best way to get interested parties who'll do real review? I would
think review from the people actively working with and using that code
would be more valuable - that's Darrick, in this instance.
