[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250521162753.GA6112@eaf>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 13:27:53 -0300
From: Ernesto A. Fernández <ernesto.mnd.fernandez@...il.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Yangtao Li <frank.li@...o.com>, ethan@...ancedwards.com,
asahi@...ts.linux.dev, brauner@...nel.org, dan.carpenter@...aro.org,
ernesto@...ellium.com, gargaditya08@...e.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
sven@...npeter.dev, tytso@....edu, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
willy@...radead.org, slava@...eyko.com,
glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de
Subject: Re: Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 0/8] staging: apfs: init APFS filesystem
support
Hi,
just one nitpick:
On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:14:53PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> We already carry
> quite a few filesystem drivers used by very few people and since few people
> are interested it them it's difficult to find people to get these drivers
> converted to new mount API, iomap infrastructure, new page cache APIs etc.
> which forces us to keep carring the old interfaces. This gets particularly
> painful for filesystems where we don't have full specification so usually
> the mkfs and fsck tooling is not as comprehensive which makes testing
> changes harder.
For the record, my fsck [1] is far more thorough than the official one, I
don't take data corruption lightly. It's only for testing though, it doesn't
actually fix anything. And of course it could have mistakes since the
specification is incomplete and buggy.
[1] https://github.com/linux-apfs/apfsprogs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists