Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 29 Aug 2019 18:58:11 +0800
From:   Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@huawei.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
CC:     Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, "Pavel Machek" <pavel@denx.de>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>,
        Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
        "Dave Chinner" <david@fromorbit.com>,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org>, Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>,
        Miao Xie <miaoxie@huawei.com>,
        Li Guifu <bluce.liguifu@huawei.com>,
        Fang Wei <fangwei1@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/24] erofs: add on-disk layout
Message-ID: <20190829105811.GC64893@architecture4>
References: <20190802125347.166018-1-gaoxiang25@huawei.com>
 <20190802125347.166018-2-gaoxiang25@huawei.com>
 <20190829095954.GB20598@infradead.org>
 <20190829103252.GA64893@architecture4>
 <20190829103604.GA13309@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190829103604.GA13309@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Christoph,

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 03:36:04AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 06:32:53PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > I can fix it up as you like but I still cannot get
> > what is critical issues here.
> 
> The problem is that the whole codebase is way substandard quality,
> looking a lot like Linux code from 20 years ago.  Yes, we already have
> plenty of code of that standard in the tree, but we should not add more.

I still cannot get your point what does your substandard quality mean,
please refer to some thing critical in EROFS (and I noticed that your
new code still has bug) rather than naming.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang