Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 17:54:56 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@freebsd.org> Cc: "Conrad E. Meyer" <cem@freebsd.org>, Eugene Grosbein <eugen@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r343118 - in head/usr.sbin: . trim Message-ID: <CANCZdfrop=gwfyg0mF5A%2Bc4BLJOjmngUZ32py-jd9Y9EY3xfFQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201901180048.x0I0mois052935@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <CANCZdfpYtB_joN85U7NfchCBp%2BXLcHwGDXoohMMyJmkuaSUcew@mail.gmail.com> <201901180048.x0I0mois052935@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 5:48 PM Rodney W. Grimes < freebsd@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 3:43 PM Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 1:16 PM Eugene Grosbein <eugen@freebsd.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > 18.01.2019 3:23, Conrad Meyer ?????: > > > > > > > > > Please back it out; stop attributing code review to "hackers@," > which > > > > > can not (it's a list, not individuals) and did not review this > > > > > changeset; and put it on phabricator for actual review. > > > > > > > > There is already https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18380 by imp > > > > and there were over 6 weeks since it had an update. > > > > Newly committed code has most of its changes. > > > > > > Your response does not address *any* of the above concerns. It's just > > > unrelated. > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > The review you linked to isn't one you submitted for this change; it's > > > Warner's, and that one stalled because you were such a jerk to him > > > last time that he needed time off from you. > > > > > > > I abandoned it because dd is the better way to go because it can transfer > > images with 0's and TRIM the zero'd pages (and only the zero'd pages). > Sure > > dd is hard to use, but it's not that hard to use. > > I strongly disagree that dd is the proper place for this tool, > dd is far to easy a way to destroy data when trying to do this > type of operation and should be the last choice for implementing > what is normally a very safe thing to do. > > And as eugene points out dd can not easily be made > to do "trim ada0 ada1 ada4" which is probably the > far more common use of this command > for i in ada0 ada1 ada4; do dd of=/dev/$i if=/dev/zero conv=trim &; done; wait if that's your objection. It's a weak counter argument, but this really isn't the place for the debate. > dd's ability to do sparse(ing) of a file should NOT be > overloaded with a device layer block trimming function. > It's not overloaded. You have to specifically ask for the conversion. It's the right place for it. > > > > > > > If you want to socialize, revive, or expedite someone else's review, > > > maybe add a new comment to the review, or post a discussion hackers@, > > > or something like that. You still can't attribute code review to > > > hackers@, especially as no such review happened. > > > > > > > I think it should be backed out. Especially since it hijacks my work and > my > > name to try to ram it into the tree. > > > > I'm very much not amused. > > Nor am I with some of the reactoin to the commit :-( > I'm sorry, but I fire back when people abuse me. Especially when it's a repeat offender who clearly didn't internalize the feedback given the first time. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfrop=gwfyg0mF5A%2Bc4BLJOjmngUZ32py-jd9Y9EY3xfFQ>