linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/9] btrfs: zstd: Switch to the zstd-1.4.6 API

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <E412C519-27B8-495D-BF52-3EC4D161D1A0@fb.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:01:11 -0400
From:   "Chris Mason" <clm@...com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC:     Nick Terrell <nickrterrell@...il.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        <squashfs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        <linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
        Nick Terrell <terrelln@...com>, Petr Malat <oss@...at.biz>,
        Johannes Weiner <jweiner@...com>,
        Niket Agarwal <niketa@...com>, Yann Collet <cyan@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] btrfs: zstd: Switch to the zstd-1.4.6 API

On 16 Sep 2020, at 10:46, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:43:04AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
>> Otherwise we just end up with drift and kernel-specific bugs that are 
>> harder
>> to debug.  To the extent those APIs make us contort the kernel code, 
>> I???m
>> sure Nick is interested in improving things in both places.
>
> Seriously, we do not care elsewhere.  Why would zlib be any different?

Is the zlib upstream active?  Or trying to sync active development with 
the kernel?  I’d suggest the same path for them if they were.

>
>> There are probably 1000 constructive ways to have that conversation.  
>> Please
>> choose one of those instead of being an asshole.
>
> I think you are the asshole here by ignoring the practices we are 
> using
> elsewhere and think your employers pet project is somehow special.  It
> is not, and claiming so is everything but constructive.

I’m happy to advocate for more constructive discussion for anyone’s 
project.  I tend to pick threads where I have context and I know the 
people involved.

The kernel best practices are pragmatic.  As one of many users of any 
established-non-kernel project, there’s a compromise between the APIs 
they are using for a broad base of users and us.  I’m sure they are 
interested in improving life for all of their users, while also 
improving maintainability for us.

-chris