Messages in this thread | | | From | Philipp Reisner <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] drbd-8.4 for mainline | Date | Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:49:43 +0200 |
| |
Am Mittwoch 24 August 2011, 19:02:20 schrieb Jens Axboe: > On 2011-08-24 18:00, Kyle Moffett wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:41, Philipp Reisner > > > > <philipp.reisner@linbit.com> wrote: > >> Hi Jens, > >> > >> First the announcement of drbd-8.4, then the git pull-request text: > >> > >> We are proud to announce the availability of DRBD-8.4.0. > >> > >> The most noticeable change is the support for multiple replicated > >> volumes in a single DRBD connection. > >> Write-ordering is obeyed among all writes in all volumes in a > >> single connection. > >> This feature is really important for users who DRBD for mirroring > >> over longer distances. (Protocol A). > >> > >> We do not only release DRBD-8.4.0 today: > >> The DRBD User's Guide was reviewed and updated to match DRBD-8.4. > >> > >> I suggest to everybody who considers to upgrade from 8.3 to 8.4 > >> to have a look at the "Recent changes" appendix of the UG: > >> http://www.drbd.org/users-guide/ap-recent-changes.html > >> > >> This release brings a new meta-data format. Forward (8.3 -> 8.4) > >> conversion happens complete seamless. Backward conversion > >> is done by a single command (drbdadm apply-al res). > >> > >> This release is protocol compatible with all it predecessor. > >> Although, we do not recommend to run it in 8.3 - 8.4 for long > >> time frames. We recommend to use that capability only for the > >> rolling upgrade. > >> > >> drbdadm of 8.4 can parse config files of 8.3. We recommend > >> to switch to the new configuration syntax after the upgrade > >> of both nodes. (Use drbdadm dump to learn about the new > >> config syntax) > > > > Hm... > > > > That's a lot of patches (including some protocol changes) that have not > > yet been reviewed by other kernel developers. > > > > By officially releasing the kernel and user-space bits and then posting > > them to LKML and expecting them to be merged as-is, you are not really > > following the linux kernel development process. > > > > Some of the reverts and commit messages make me concerned that your > > patch series has bisection issues; are you sure it compiles and runs > > after every patch? > > > > I'm obviously not anywhere in the maintenance chain for this code, but > > it does look really funny. > > That was my exact response a few weeks back, but I don't recall seeing > anything until this email today. Philipp, has this been reviewed at all > outside your internal group?
Yes, I requested review on LKML. See here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/8/179
Best, Phil
| |