Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From:   Kirsten Bromilow <kirsten1@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [hfs?] WARNING in hfs_write_inode
Date:   Fri, 21 Jul 2023 07:42:46 +0100
Message-Id: <FE018F29-9CBB-471B-AB93-C4701AD9C4B1@gmail.com>
References: <ZLnbN4Mm9L5wCzOK@casper.infradead.org>
Cc:     Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
        John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Viacheslav Dubeyko <slava@dubeyko.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        syzbot <syzbot+7bb7cd3595533513a9e7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        christian.brauner@ubuntu.com,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com,
        ZhangPeng <zhangpeng362@huawei.com>,
        linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
        debian-ports <debian-ports@lists.debian.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZLnbN4Mm9L5wCzOK@casper.infradead.org>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk

Please stop sending these emails to me and remove me from the recipient list=
?
!

Sent from my iPhone

> On 21 Jul 2023, at 02:27, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFOn Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 11:03:28AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Jul 2023, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>=20
>>>> I suspect that this is one of those catch-22 situations: distros are=20=

>>>> going to enable every feature under the sun. That doesn't mean that=20
>>>> anyone is actually _using_ them these days.
>>=20
>> I think the value of filesystem code is not just a question of how often=20=

>> it gets executed -- it's also about retaining access to the data collecte=
d=20
>> in archives, museums, galleries etc. that is inevitably held in old=20
>> formats.
>=20
> That's an argument for adding support to tar, not for maintaining
> read/write support.
>=20
>>> We need to much more proactive about dropping support for unmaintained=20=

>>> filesystems that nobody is ever fixing despite the constant stream of=20=

>>> corruption- and deadlock- related bugs reported against them.
>>=20
>> IMO, a stream of bug reports is not a reason to remove code (it's a reaso=
n=20
>> to revert some commits).
>>=20
>> Anyway, that stream of bugs presumably flows from the unstable kernel API=
,=20
>> which is inherently high-maintenance. It seems that a stable API could be=
=20
>> more appropriate for any filesystem for which the on-disk format is fixed=
=20
>> (by old media, by unmaintained FLOSS implementations or abandoned=20
>> proprietary implementations).
>=20
> You've misunderstood.  Google have decided to subject the entire kernel
> (including obsolete unmaintained filesystems) to stress tests that it's
> never had before.  IOW these bugs have been there since the code was
> merged.  There's nothing to back out.  There's no API change to blame.
> It's always been buggy and it's never mattered before.
>=20
> It wouldn't be so bad if Google had also decided to fund people to fix
> those bugs, but no, they've decided to dump them on public mailing lists
> and berate developers into fixing them.
>=20