32 ms·

The key thing here is I've never challenged Linus's authority on patches outside fs/bcachefs/; I've quietly respun pull requests for that, on more than one occa

The key thing here is I've never challenged Linus's authority on patches outside fs/bcachefs/; I've quietly respun pull requests for that, on more than one occasion. The point of contention here was a patch within fs/bcachefs/, which was repair code to make sure users didn't lose data. If we can't have clear boundaries and delineations of responsibility, there really is no future for bcachefs in the kernel; my core mission is a rock solid commitment to reliability and robustness, including being responsive to issues users hit, and we've seen repeatedly that the kernel process does not share those priorities.

tux3 1y ago
You may be right, but I think looking at it from a lens of who has authority and can impose their decision is still illustrating the point I'm trying to make. To some extent drawing clear boundaries is good as a last resort when people cannot agree, but it can't be the main way to resolve disagreements. Thinking in terms of who owns what and has the final say is not the same as trying to understand the requirements from the other side to find a solution that works for everyone. I don't think the right answer is to blindly follow whatever Linus or other people say. I don't mean you should automatically back down without technical reasons, because authority says so. But I notice I can't remember an email where concessions where made, or attemps to find a middle grounds by understanding the other side. Maybe someone can find counterexamples. But this idea of using ownership to decide who has more authority and can impose their vision, that can't be the only way to collaborate. It really is uncompromising.
- koverstreet 1y ago
  > To some extent drawing clear boundaries is good as a last resort when people cannot agree, but it can't be the main way to resolve disagreements. Thinking in terms of who owns what and has the final say is not the same as trying to understand the requirements from the other side to find a solution that works for everyone. Agreed 100%. In an ideal world, we'd be sitting down together, figuring out what our shared priorities are, and working from there. Unfortunately, that hasn't been possible, and I have no idea what Linus's priorities except that they definitely aren't a bulletproof filesystem and safeguarding user data; his response to journal_rewind demonstrated that quite definitively. So that's where we're at, and given the history with other local filesystems I think I have good reason not to concede. I don't want to see bcachefs run off the rails, but given all the times I've talked about process and the way I'm doing things I think that's exactly what would happen if I started conceding on these points. It's my life's work, after all. You'd think bcachefs's track record (e.g. bug tracker, syzbot) and the response it gets from users would be enough, but apparently not, sadly. But given the way the kernel burns people out and outright ejects them, not too surprising.
  - tux3 1y ago
    Fair enough. As someone who has lost filesystems to bugs and files to corrupted blocks, I definitely appreciate the work you've done on repair and reliability. I think there's room to have your cake and eat it too, but I certainly can't blame you for caring about quality, that much is sure.
  - magicalhippo 1y ago
    > Unfortunately, that hasn't been possible, and I have no idea what Linus's priorities except that they definitely aren't a bulletproof filesystem and safeguarding user data Remarks like this come across as extremely patronizing, as you completely ignore what the other party says and instead project your own conclusions about the other persons motives and beliefs. > his response to journal_rewind demonstrated that quite definitively No, no it did not in any shape way or form do that. You had multiple other perfectly valid options to help the affected users besides getting that code shipped in the kernel there and then. Getting it shipped in the kernel was merely a convenience. If bcachefs was established and stable it would be a different matter. But it's an experimental file system. Per definition data loss is to be expected, even if recovery is preferable.
    - koverstreet 1y ago
      No, bcachefs-tools wasn't an option because the right way to do this kind of repair is to first do a dry run test repair and mount, so you can verify with your eyes that everything is back as it should be. If we had the fuse driver done that would have worked, though. Still not completely ideal because we're at the mercy of distros to make sure they're getting -tools updates out in a timely manner, they're not always as consistent with that as the kernel. Most are good, though). Just making it available in a git repo was not an option because lots of bcachefs users are getting it from their distro kernel and have never built a kernel before (yes, I've had to help users with building kernels for the first time; it's slow and we always look for other options), and even if you know how, if your primary machine is offline the last thing you want to have to do is build a custom rescue image with a custom kernel. And there was really nothing special about this than any other bugfix, besides needing to use a new option (which is also something that occasionally happens with hotfixes). Bugs are just a fact of life, every filesystem has bugs and occasionally has to get hotfixes out quickly. It's just not remotely feasible or sane to be coming up with our own parallel release process for hotfixes.
tuna74 1y ago
Linus T is responsible for everything in Linux, it is his project and he is the maintainer. He can do everything he wants in his branch and people just have to accept it. If you want to be responsible you have to fork Linux.
- koverstreet 1y ago
  Let's examine this, shall we? Has he ever even been involved with a bcachefs bug? No, aside from arguing against shipping bugfixes. Has he contributed in any way, besides merging code? No... Has he set rules or guidelines that benefited bcachefs reliability? No, but he has shouted down talk about automated testing. I think you're confusing power with responsibility.
  - immibis 1y ago
    You're still doing that thing where you assume everyone else is you. Linus's job (some of which he delegates) is to take the contributions from ALL the hundreds of maintainers, and bundle it into a unified coherent whole. He is not only responsible for bcachefs reliability. In the train analogy I already used, he is the train driver, he is responsible for getting everyone who is on the train to their destination, but he is not responsible for ensuring that you're on the train. It's your responsibility to ensure that you're on the train when it departs. You are one of those maintainers (not any more). Your code can be taken into the bundle (not any more), but on the bundle's schedule, not yours. You have consistently failed to understand that the train doesn't wait for you - if you are late, you get on the next one. If you don't want to get on the next one, then don't be late. Normal people, after missing a train once or twice, would adjust their schedule accordingly so they won't miss it next time. But your exclusive, repeated reaction has been to yell at the train driver and the station master, which is why you've been kicked out of the station. Have you ever ridden a train, by the way? Were you on time? (Deutsche Bahn doesn't count because they're not on time)
    - koverstreet 1y ago
      We're not talking about situations where the bcachefs changes could plausibly affect the rest of the kernel, and I am well known even within the kernel community for being on top of potential issues and responsive on bugs.

tux3 1y ago

You may be right, but I think looking at it from a lens of who has authority and can impose their decision is still illustrating the point I'm trying to make. To some extent drawing clear boundaries is good as a last resort when people cannot agree, but it can't be the main way to resolve disagreements. Thinking in terms of who owns what and has the final say is not the same as trying to understand the requirements from the other side to find a solution that works for everyone. I don't think the right answer is to blindly follow whatever Linus or other people say. I don't mean you should automatically back down without technical reasons, because authority says so. But I notice I can't remember an email where concessions where made, or attemps to find a middle grounds by understanding the other side. Maybe someone can find counterexamples. But this idea of using ownership to decide who has more authority and can impose their vision, that can't be the only way to collaborate. It really is uncompromising.

koverstreet 1y ago
> To some extent drawing clear boundaries is good as a last resort when people cannot agree, but it can't be the main way to resolve disagreements. Thinking in terms of who owns what and has the final say is not the same as trying to understand the requirements from the other side to find a solution that works for everyone. Agreed 100%. In an ideal world, we'd be sitting down together, figuring out what our shared priorities are, and working from there. Unfortunately, that hasn't been possible, and I have no idea what Linus's priorities except that they definitely aren't a bulletproof filesystem and safeguarding user data; his response to journal_rewind demonstrated that quite definitively. So that's where we're at, and given the history with other local filesystems I think I have good reason not to concede. I don't want to see bcachefs run off the rails, but given all the times I've talked about process and the way I'm doing things I think that's exactly what would happen if I started conceding on these points. It's my life's work, after all. You'd think bcachefs's track record (e.g. bug tracker, syzbot) and the response it gets from users would be enough, but apparently not, sadly. But given the way the kernel burns people out and outright ejects them, not too surprising.
- tux3 1y ago
  Fair enough. As someone who has lost filesystems to bugs and files to corrupted blocks, I definitely appreciate the work you've done on repair and reliability. I think there's room to have your cake and eat it too, but I certainly can't blame you for caring about quality, that much is sure.
- magicalhippo 1y ago
  > Unfortunately, that hasn't been possible, and I have no idea what Linus's priorities except that they definitely aren't a bulletproof filesystem and safeguarding user data Remarks like this come across as extremely patronizing, as you completely ignore what the other party says and instead project your own conclusions about the other persons motives and beliefs. > his response to journal_rewind demonstrated that quite definitively No, no it did not in any shape way or form do that. You had multiple other perfectly valid options to help the affected users besides getting that code shipped in the kernel there and then. Getting it shipped in the kernel was merely a convenience. If bcachefs was established and stable it would be a different matter. But it's an experimental file system. Per definition data loss is to be expected, even if recovery is preferable.
  - koverstreet 1y ago
    No, bcachefs-tools wasn't an option because the right way to do this kind of repair is to first do a dry run test repair and mount, so you can verify with your eyes that everything is back as it should be. If we had the fuse driver done that would have worked, though. Still not completely ideal because we're at the mercy of distros to make sure they're getting -tools updates out in a timely manner, they're not always as consistent with that as the kernel. Most are good, though). Just making it available in a git repo was not an option because lots of bcachefs users are getting it from their distro kernel and have never built a kernel before (yes, I've had to help users with building kernels for the first time; it's slow and we always look for other options), and even if you know how, if your primary machine is offline the last thing you want to have to do is build a custom rescue image with a custom kernel. And there was really nothing special about this than any other bugfix, besides needing to use a new option (which is also something that occasionally happens with hotfixes). Bugs are just a fact of life, every filesystem has bugs and occasionally has to get hotfixes out quickly. It's just not remotely feasible or sane to be coming up with our own parallel release process for hotfixes.

tuna74 1y ago

Linus T is responsible for everything in Linux, it is his project and he is the maintainer. He can do everything he wants in his branch and people just have to accept it. If you want to be responsible you have to fork Linux.

koverstreet 1y ago
Let's examine this, shall we? Has he ever even been involved with a bcachefs bug? No, aside from arguing against shipping bugfixes. Has he contributed in any way, besides merging code? No... Has he set rules or guidelines that benefited bcachefs reliability? No, but he has shouted down talk about automated testing. I think you're confusing power with responsibility.
- immibis 1y ago
  You're still doing that thing where you assume everyone else is you. Linus's job (some of which he delegates) is to take the contributions from ALL the hundreds of maintainers, and bundle it into a unified coherent whole. He is not only responsible for bcachefs reliability. In the train analogy I already used, he is the train driver, he is responsible for getting everyone who is on the train to their destination, but he is not responsible for ensuring that you're on the train. It's your responsibility to ensure that you're on the train when it departs. You are one of those maintainers (not any more). Your code can be taken into the bundle (not any more), but on the bundle's schedule, not yours. You have consistently failed to understand that the train doesn't wait for you - if you are late, you get on the next one. If you don't want to get on the next one, then don't be late. Normal people, after missing a train once or twice, would adjust their schedule accordingly so they won't miss it next time. But your exclusive, repeated reaction has been to yell at the train driver and the station master, which is why you've been kicked out of the station. Have you ever ridden a train, by the way? Were you on time? (Deutsche Bahn doesn't count because they're not on time)
  - koverstreet 1y ago
    We're not talking about situations where the bcachefs changes could plausibly affect the rest of the kernel, and I am well known even within the kernel community for being on top of potential issues and responsive on bugs.