Re: [PATCH] LVM Cachevol and Integrity volumes break entire LVM VG

[Patrick Plenefisch]

Ah thanks, I sent them in two separate emails with git format-patch,
hopefully correctly?

Patrick

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 7:13 PM Glenn Washburn
<development@efficientek.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 18:10:16 -0500
> Glenn Washburn <development@efficientek.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 21:00:19 -0500
> > Patrick Plenefisch <simonpatp@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thankfully, no further changes were actually necessary, so here is my
> > > attempt to convert it to two patches
> > >
> > > I attached the diffs, but also committed them to
> > > https://github.com/byteit101/grub2/tree/grub-lvmintegrity
> >
> > I saw your recent email about wondering what the expected time frame
> > should be for submitted patches. I think there has been no follow up on
> > this in part because external branches and repos are generally not
> > looked at. You should submit the new patches as a "v2" and you'll
> > likely have more of a chance of it getting looked at. All development
> > happens on list. Another problem is a dearth of reviewers. The distro
> > guys review their own stuff and each others, but as a rule not much
> > else. Daniel reviews everything that ultimately gets accepted and a
> > good deal that doesn't, and so is stretched thin. If you make his life
> > easier (eg. by submitting patches inline to the list), you'll have a
> > better chance of things moving more quickly or at all.
>
> And I just noticed that you did send the patches as attachments. You
> should send patches with git-format-patch and git-send with a
> cover letter for multi-patch series. Also, if you haven't heard
> anything in a month, you can ping Daniel on the thread to see what the
> status is.
>
> >
> > The situation is unfortunate, in that, as I see it, GRUB is still in
> > the stone age when it comes to the development process. Using an pull
> > request / patch tracker would be great and useful, but there's not
> > much will at the top to move away from the list as the sole method of
> > change submission.
> >
> > Glenn
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 3:06 PM Daniel Kiper <dkiper@net-space.pl> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 02:52:37PM -0500, Patrick Plenefisch wrote:
> > > > > Hmm, what would the logical parts be? The solution for both cachevol 
> > > > > and
> > > > > integrity is the same.
> > > >
> > > > It seems to me at least code refactoring which you are doing could be
> > > > taken out to a separate patch. Maybe something else... Anyway, in 
> > > > general
> > > > smaller patches ease reviewing...
> > > >
> > > > > I do know another part needs to be added as I still need to 
> > > > > investigate some
> > > > > warnings, but I'll likely need to do that this weekend when I have 
> > > > > some more
> > > > > time.
> > > >
> > > > Cool! Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Daniel