From: "Valdis Klētnieks" <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@microsoft.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/staging/exfat - by default, prohibit mount of fat/vfat
Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2019 19:13:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <389078.1567379634@turing-police> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190901224329.GH7777@dread.disaster.area>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1632 bytes --]
On Mon, 02 Sep 2019 08:43:29 +1000, Dave Chinner said:
> I don't know the details of the exfat spec or the code to know what
> the best approach is. I've worked fairly closely with Christoph for
> more than a decade - you need to think about what he says rather
> than /how he says it/ because there's a lot of thought and knowledge
> behind his reasoning. Hence if I were implementing exfat and
> Christoph was saying "throw it away and extend fs/fat"
> then that's what I'd be doing.
Again, I'm not ruling that out if that's the consensus direction. After all,
the goal is to merge a working driver - and for that, I need to produce
something that the file system maintainers will be willing to merge, which
means doing it in a way they want it...
Hopefully next week a few other people will weigh in with what they prefer as
far as approach goes. Only definite statement I've heard so far was
Christoph's...
> and we don't want more. Implementing exfat on top of fs/fat kills
> two birds with one stone - it modernises the fs/fat code base and
> brings new functionality that will have more developers interested
> in maintaining it over the long term.
Any recommendations on how to approach that? Clone the current fs/fat code
and develop on top of that, or create a branch of it and on occasion do the
merging needed to track further fs/fat development?
Mostly asking for workflow suggestions - what's known to work well for this
sort of situation, where we know we won't be merging until we have several
thousand lines of new code? And any "don't do <this> or you'll regret it
later" advice is also appreciated. :)
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-01 23:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-30 16:42 [PATCH] drivers/staging/exfat - by default, prohibit mount of fat/vfat Valdis Klētnieks
2019-08-30 16:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-31 0:48 ` Valdis Klētnieks
2019-08-31 6:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-31 10:25 ` Valdis Klētnieks
2019-08-31 14:24 ` Andy Shevchenko
2019-08-31 14:51 ` Valdis Klētnieks
2019-09-01 1:07 ` Dave Chinner
2019-09-01 1:37 ` Gao Xiang
2019-09-01 3:05 ` Al Viro
2019-09-01 3:26 ` Gao Xiang
2019-09-01 3:37 ` Valdis Klētnieks
2019-09-01 22:43 ` Dave Chinner
2019-09-01 23:13 ` Valdis Klētnieks [this message]
2019-09-02 7:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-09-02 7:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-09-02 15:25 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-09-02 19:00 ` Valdis Klētnieks
2019-09-02 19:06 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-09-08 10:50 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=389078.1567379634@turing-police \
--to=valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=alexander.levin@microsoft.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).