From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D692BC004D4 for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 18:21:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229827AbjASSVr (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2023 13:21:47 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47040 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229943AbjASSVn (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2023 13:21:43 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 844059373F; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 10:21:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id BD4F468D0D; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 19:21:37 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 19:21:37 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: David Sterba Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Chris Mason , Josef Bacik , David Sterba , Damien Le Moal , Naohiro Aota , Johannes Thumshirn , Qu Wenruo , Jens Axboe , "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/19] btrfs: handle checksum validation and repair at the storage layer Message-ID: <20230119182137.GA9388@lst.de> References: <20230112090532.1212225-1-hch@lst.de> <20230112090532.1212225-3-hch@lst.de> <20230117191222.GC11562@twin.jikos.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230117191222.GC11562@twin.jikos.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 08:12:22PM +0100, David Sterba wrote: > The changelog sounds like a good cover letter for a series, overall > description but lacks more details. So, I've done a massive split, but I need guidance on what you want for a changelog. There is one bit here which I've incorporated: > - use of mempool must be mentioned in the changelog with explanation > that it's the safe usage pattern and why it cannot lead to lockups but otherwise I'm at at loss. Do you want descriptions of what the low-level changes are counter to the normal normal Linux way of explain why the changes are done an what the high level design decisions are? Or is there something else that is not obvious from the patch and needs more elaboration? I can't really think of much that's missing, but maybe it's easy to overlook important points when you've been staring at the code for half a year. Here is the current commit text: http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/misc.git/commitdiff/c88b5ef41a8e0b5daf645eea415ade683e2d8b72