> Really anytime there's a problem in the kernel, you need to try the workload with a mainline kernel and report the problem to the upstream kernel list if you

> Really anytime there's a problem in the kernel, you need to try the workload with a mainline kernel and report the problem to the upstream kernel list if you can reproduce it. If you can't reproduce the problem with mainline, then you have to take up the bug with your distro. That's the way it is with everything, not just Btrfs. Sure, if I have a bug with program X that's patched by distro Y, that's the normal support path. I think there's a couple issues with applying that same logic to a filesystem that's supposedly stable enough to be used as a root FS though. First, a filesystem should generally be stable enough that patches applied by a distro don't completely ruin it. How many bugs have there been in ext4 or xfs that were specific to one distro and their kernel patches? They're certainly possible, but I would think that pre-release testing would catch the vast majority of them. Red Hat dropping support of btrfs was a big vote of no confidence here, because it's not just lack of support for RHEL users, it implies lack of testing efforts even for Centos & Fedora users. Second, if I'm having issues with my root filesystem, it's a bit of a crapshoot as to whether the system is stable enough to compile a mainline kernel and try to reproduce the bug while running that. And finally, I simply don't want bugs in my root filesystem. I don't even want to get to the point of pondering if I should send the bug report to my distro or to the mainline kernel. I want my root filesystem to be a thing that Just Works, without having to think about it.