Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:1;
Date:   Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:56:59 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Peter Lafreniere <peter@n8pjl.ca>, segher@kernel.crashing.org,
        anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru,
        jack@suse.cz, johannes@sipsolutions.net,
        linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-um@lists.infradead.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        richard.henderson@linaro.org, richard@nod.at,
        tsbogend@alpha.franken.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] arch/*: config: Remove ReiserFS from defconfig
Message-ID: <20230920165659.coe7d2lydiaatoby@quack3>
References: <20230918175529.19011-1-peter@n8pjl.ca>
 <20230918234108.GN19790@gate.crashing.org>
 <20230919000026.7409-1-peter@n8pjl.ca>
 <20230919151630.GO19790@gate.crashing.org>
 <20230919155832.4179-1-peter@n8pjl.ca>
 <CAMuHMdXQ=xpeY3tmLXe1kgJbRtmVAn62rEhvzO+VB7GCgy4F8w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXQ=xpeY3tmLXe1kgJbRtmVAn62rEhvzO+VB7GCgy4F8w@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue 19-09-23 18:02:39, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 5:58 PM Peter Lafreniere <peter@n8pjl.ca> wrote:
> >  2) Stops building an obsolete and largely-unused filesystem unnecessarily.
> >     Some hobbyist targets like m68k and alpha may prefer to keep all filesystems
> >     available until total removal, but others like arm and UML have no need for
> >     ReiserFS to be built unless specifically configured.
> 
> As UML is used a lot for testing, isn't it actually counter-productive
> to remove ReiserFS from the UML defconfig?  The less testing it
> receives, the higher the chance of introducing regressions.

The only testing I know about for reiserfs (besides build testing) is
syzbot. And regarding the people / bots doing filesystem testing I know
none of them uses UML. Rather it is x86 VMs these days where reiserfs is
disabled in the defconfig for a *long* time (many years). Also when you do
filesystem testing, you usually just test the few filesystems you care
about and for which you have all the tools installed. So frankly I don't
see a good reason to leave reiserfs enabled in defconfigs. But sure if
m68k or other arch wants to keep reiserfs in it's defconfig for some
consistency reasons, I'm fine with it. I just suspect that for most archs
this is just a historical reason.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR