Re: [PATCH 0/5] raid56: variant bug fixes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 11:48:37AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> So raid56 bug fixes are the same case as qgroup fixes now?

Not now, it's been like that forever. Or should have been, we're not
perfect, but should strive not to skip reviews just because we want to
let new code in.

> No reviewer so no merge?
> 
> I understand we need enough reviewer, however there is never enough 
> reviewer for *minor* functions, like qgroup or raid56.

I would not call them minor. Qgroups are hooked to the core of the
operations, raid56 is a compartment, but can become complex regarding
the error modes and safety constraints.

> Such situation will just make such functions starve, bugs makes fewer 
> tester and users, fewer users leads to even fewer developers, causing a 
> minus spiral.

Unreviewed code is more buggy, leads to the same. You've been around for
a long time, I'm sure you'll remember times when an underreviewed
patchset caused headaches for several major releases. All developers
have record of a major problem in their code, that's why we must do the
reviews.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux