Things have taken a bad turn for Bcachefs as Linux supremo Linus Torvalds is not happy with their objections.

all 37 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 110 points 1 year ago (5 children)

“no features in RCs” is a very basic rule, this was a forgone conclusion. If these features were so integral to data integrity, he should have kept bcachefs out of the kernel until they were ready.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 65 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    There is no reason that Kent Overstreet needed to do this.

    I love bcachefs but I am so angry at him for making this happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    There is in this case, and why Linus did accept the patch in the end. Previous cases less so though which is why Linus is so pissed at this one.

    The reason for this new feature is to help fix data loss on users systems - which is a fine line between a bug and a new feature really. There is precedent for this type on thing in RC releases from other filesystems as well. So the issue in this instance is a lot less black and white.

    That doesn't excuse previous behaviour though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    The problem is that kent is a bullshitter and acted like he doesnt get what a feature freeze is. If he cant communicate with linus as to why his patch is actually bugfix then he cant contribute to the kernel.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago

    Good for him. It's a reminder that the rules apply to everybody.

  • source
  • [–] 76 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    My uneducated kernel take. Flexibility is acceptable and desirable in small projects or low impact projects.

    When the majority of the internet and a good chunk of PC are dependent on your project, predictability and stability is much more important than flexibility.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 79 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Reading all the comments (between Kent and Linux), the problem is that the bcachefs dev thinks that his project (the filesystem) is the critically important one and that the Linux kernel needs to bend to his will.

    I am a bcachefs user but it is pretty damn obvious to me that the production Linux kernel is more important than an experimental filesystem.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 78 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Took me way too long to figure out this stuff is called B Cache FS and not BCA Chefs.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 64 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (17 children)

    Anyone else here actively put off by Linux drama and headlines like "Torvalds Drops support After Clash!"

    EDIT: New rule?

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm really glad Torvalds is the kind of person to flip articles like this off and carry on with his day and just not be affected by it at all. When the time comes, I hope whoever carries the torch is just as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That's a good point, I have no doubt Linux would not be in the position it is if he were more sensitive to it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    At the very least, it would be far more of a circus, as the follow-up articles would read "LINUX KERNEL CREATOR LINUS TORVALDS MAKES DEVESTATING REPLY TO FOSS DRAMA!"

    But yeah, I think shit like that would just make devs want to go work for a company, because at least when they make a shitty closed sourced, exploitive program people are mad at the company, not them, specifically. They don't have to deal with this shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 41 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    This is a non-issue, being over-reported by people looking for clicks. A minor technical matter being handled by the person ultimately responsible for handling such things

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Yeah for sure there's ton of clickbait, but this isn't "a minor technical matter". The news here isn't the clash over whether the patch should be accepted in the RC branch, but the fact that Linus said he wants to remove bcachefs from the kernel tree.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    An experimental capability being kicked out of the kernel, so that it has to settle for being a kernel module or custom forks of the kernel, is absolutely a minor matter

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Filesystems are incredibly antiquated, and while I don't agree with Kent's attitude, it is very important in the long run that filesystems catch back up.

    As it stands just about any enterprise system you can poke a stick at is rolling their own customised file storage system, with a traditional filesystem typically being a misshapen dead weight sitting somewhere in the middle of it - existing because it's the only thing the kernel can integrate with.

    It is pretty important that this trend reverses, and bcachefs was a big step in the right direction. Unfortunate that Kent is the way he is.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I don't see any drama. It's just people working together, having different priorities yet still getting things done. Some friction is to be expected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Don't you dare turn this around on me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago

    Ah, sorry to read - I like the idea of Bcachefs and would have been happy to have it ready for production eventually.

    OTOH it seems the recent years I read more about the drama about Bcachefs commits to the kernel, than about any technical parts of Bcachefs.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Can't wait for a new Brodie-video on this topic. Stay tuned for some comments.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Good I didn't choose bcachefs

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's an interesting filesystem, but you shouldn't use it at this point unless you know what the hell you're doing. You'll need to be able to notice, report and help resolve bugs, and under no circumstances use it for production or where you can't afford to lose some or all of the data on the partition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 5 comments in c/linux@programming.dev view that post
    [–] 36 points 1 year ago

    This is actually kind of tame by Kent's standards.

    It's a shame honestly. He seems smart but he doesn't seem to realize that the linux kernel is not just for his "customers." It's literally for everyone. He seems to think he can make whatever changes and it'll be fine (perhaps it will be) but doesn't understand that the people using bcachefs are a tiny, tiny, tiny portion of overall Linux users who need stability in the kernel.

    That and anyone using bcachefs 1) probably shouldn't be holding so much data on it given how it changes and 2) should be able to build a kernel with the patches if needed because it's experimental and...if you're doing that you should know what you're doing.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago

    Reading Kents unhinged messages, that seemed inevitable in hindsight.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Types of headache #4: Kent.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Kent's acting like this is a production filesystem and users need to have his fixes RFN. Anyone using bcachefs in anger needs their head examined. They should expect it to blow up completely, and they can pick up the pieces.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    As expected. I like bcachefs and the features it already has, but switched away because of the drama/instability.

  • source