Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1162446AbWLBMCp (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Dec 2006 07:02:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1423742AbWLBMCp (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Dec 2006 07:02:45 -0500 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:266 "EHLO spitz.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1162446AbWLBMCo (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Dec 2006 07:02:44 -0500 Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 11:40:17 +0000 From: Pavel Machek To: Russell Cattelan Cc: Al Viro , cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Cluster-devel] Re: [GFS2] Change argument of gfs2_dinode_out [17/70] Message-ID: <20061202114016.GA4030@ucw.cz> References: <1164888933.3752.338.camel@quoit.chygwyn.com> <1165000744.1194.89.camel@xenon.msp.redhat.com> <20061201192555.GD3078@ftp.linux.org.uk> <1165006331.1194.96.camel@xenon.msp.redhat.com> <20061201210849.GF3078@ftp.linux.org.uk> <1165015786.1194.133.camel@xenon.msp.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1165015786.1194.133.camel@xenon.msp.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1479 Lines: 36 Hi! > > > code clean up are not without risk and with no regression test suite to > > > verify > > > that a "cleanup" has not broken something. Cleanups are very much a > > > hindrance to stabilization. With no know working points in a code > > > history it becomes difficult > > > to bisect changes and figure out when bugs were introduced > > > Especially when cleanups are mixed in with bug fixes. > > > > > > Pretty code does not equal correct code. > > > > No, but convoluted and unreadable code ends up being crappier due > > to lack of review. And that's aside of the memory footprint, > > likeliness of bugs introduced by code modifications (having in-core > > and on-disk data structures with different contents and the same C > > type => trouble that won't be caught by compiler), etc. > > Nothing makes up for the complete lack of GFS2 testing. > reviewed code does not equal correct code either. Tested code does not equal correct code, either. > gfs2 is supposed to be stabilized and use-able for the up coming rhel5 > release, not pretty up for somebody to print out and hang on their wall. Feel free to keep rhel5 ugly, but we are talking mainline here. Pavel -- Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins. - 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/