Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965065AbbEMTKD (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2015 15:10:03 -0400 Received: from mondschein.lichtvoll.de ([194.150.191.11]:37535 "EHLO mail.lichtvoll.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934472AbbEMTKA convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2015 15:10:00 -0400 From: Martin Steigerwald To: Daniel Phillips Cc: David Lang , "Theodore Ts'o" , Howard Chu , Dave Chinner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith , Pavel Machek , tux3@tux3.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, OGAWA Hirofumi Subject: Re: xfs: does mkfs.xfs require fancy switches to get decent performance? (was Tux3 Report: How fast can we fsync?) Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 21:09:58 +0200 Message-ID: <1804876.U7q4ey1Nv3@merkaba> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.7 (Linux/4.0.1-tp520-btrfs-trim-norace+; KDE/4.14.2; x86_64; git-38b5d90; 2015-04-16) In-Reply-To: <5552A844.6070806@phunq.net> References: <5552A844.6070806@phunq.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2559 Lines: 61 Am Dienstag, 12. Mai 2015, 18:26:28 schrieb Daniel Phillips: > On 05/12/2015 03:35 PM, David Lang wrote: > > On Tue, 12 May 2015, Daniel Phillips wrote: > >> On 05/12/2015 02:30 PM, David Lang wrote: > >>> You need to get out of the mindset that Ted and Dave are Enemies that > >>> you need to overcome, they are friendly competitors, not Enemies. > >> > >> You are wrong about Dave These are not the words of any friend: > >> "I don't think I'm alone in my suspicion that there was something > >> stinky about your numbers." -- Dave Chinner > > > > > > > > you are looking for offense. That just means that something is wrong > > with them, not that they were deliberatly falsified. > > I am not mistaken. Dave made sure to eliminate any doubt about > what he meant. He said "Oh, so nicely contrived. But terribly > obvious now that I've found it" among other things. Daniel, what are you trying to achieve here? I thought you wanted to create interest for your filesystem and acceptance for merging it. What I see you are actually creating tough is something different. Is what you see after you send your mails really what you want to see? If not… why not? And if you seek change, where can you create change? I really like to see Tux3 inside the kernel for easier testing, yet I also see that the way you, in your oppinion, "defend" it, does not seem to move that goal any closer, quite the opposite. It triggers polarity and resistance. I believe it to be more productive to work together with the people who will decide about what goes into the kernel and the people whose oppinions are respected by them, instead of against them. "Assume good faith" can help here. No amount of accusing people of bad intention will change them. The only thing you have the power to change is your approach. You absolutely and ultimately do not have the power to change other people. You can´t force Tux3 in by sheer willpower or attacking people. On any account for anyone discussing here: I believe that any personal attacks, counter-attacks or "you are wrong" kind of speech will not help to move this discussion out of the circling it seems to be in at the moment. Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/