From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-132.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-132.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BFBC306B3B; Wed, 24 Jun 2026 03:17:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.132 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782271055; cv=none; b=VnEaMrfjKx0P6ieo68uFBiSUQS49Cr233fYq/AYQzH/ksRALvkSWyWuZn1sftGDP8WqePUZBZn7wfJ+Kj3I59llFQnYmfg0XnBSEmxSdzT7qL+b3tyZk/cRGCHsdyKtC3TNAqM2HRpfgGOHUHzcuLiV6dxjsjwiBP4oKKT36JP8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782271055; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/KMM1mjcm/Wl0iFXtei/MIu2O9rQcRAa/9A+tS+TWrw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:Cc:References:From:To: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=oMxVzuLPTs7ICd/0RDrC+ugr+Drd1YQ6P1veo6B5BN95EBuu4I6nFwCn56cIZXi4ZUvCmI4kHsNcMuwk9mB4Ax7/ulYFuSjhkQT9s37x2unRDpPoyoRZzTi0+6hAgcYrVlPdRBTKU6UkEC3YnJYXSN0raigqUdwJzNqphB5J38Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=DfweZVmD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.132 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="DfweZVmD" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1782271049; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From:To:Content-Type; bh=+Mw0Weyp34OBYLRAaq0Yg/Q35eH/W3U3kdrm+xZigmQ=; b=DfweZVmDchTfEtnOY545xYEiPqS2Eh2bkfaw5T/QlsRJoI77bk2As1dhC1RQtcgHGMKB3viSRWHTogiO3dqpBlgGiOZYCllJ4b3zr9ld7tl10APYSZBTlC8g4gWEiqsap7fqSx1Hlz5eCF2nLQTWkD1J+SNARCpBUcUtXklWQIU= X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R171e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=maildocker-contentspam033037026112;MF=hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=12;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0X5W5S46_1782271048; Received: from 30.221.130.136(mailfrom:hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0X5W5S46_1782271048 cluster:ay36) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Wed, 24 Jun 2026 11:17:29 +0800 Message-ID: <33912eb8-6b2c-40c2-b698-837e3f675d61@linux.alibaba.com> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2026 11:17:28 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] ovl: Allow changing default fsync_mode Cc: Amir Goldstein , Christoph Hellwig , miklos@szeredi.hu, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, fuweid89@gmail.com, Christian Brauner , Jan Kara , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , LKML , derek@mcg.dev, Yafang Shao References: <13bb8cba-c82e-4a41-aff1-0a6418873bf1@linux.alibaba.com> <20260623134240.GA7980@lst.de> <1cc0931b-648e-4baf-9667-742175b3f9d0@linux.alibaba.com> From: Gao Xiang To: conduct@kernel.org In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, On 2026/6/24 10:30, Yafang Shao wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 10:28 AM Gao Xiang wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2026/6/24 10:09, Yafang Shao wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 10:52 PM Amir Goldstein wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 3:47 PM Gao Xiang wrote: >> >> ... >> >>> >>> Since the "volatile" option has been working fine for over a year >>> across our large fleet of Kubernetes production servers, I submitted >>> this change to upstream. In Kubernetes environments, there is no use >>> case for remounting the workdir to the same directory, so the volatile >>> file won't cause any issues — which is why the "volatile" setting has >>> been working well there. >> That is not an excuse to introduce such new incompatible behavior >> to the linux upstream starting only for your customized fleet and >> bother every single opensource user/application to adapt this >> behavior which uses overlayfs now. >> >> If you insist to work on a breaking change, please gather >> userspace feedback boardly first. >> >> And here I just say you and your employer are lucky since I >> know it's also risky even on the generic kubernate perspective. >> Please just maintain your livepatch downstream, thanks. >> >> No need to reply, and I won't reply this either, it's just >> waste of my time to explain a basic upstream principle again >> and again. > > I'll just go ahead and redirect you to /dev/null ;) The whole thread is: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-unionfs/20260623084337.54344-1-laoar.shao@gmail.com/T/#u Personally, I feel offensive due to Yafang's expression written above. I keep maintain my replies in technical discussion, but the replies above already include the following words: "No wonder containerd is getting harder and harder to use ;)" "Please do your homework." "Again, pls do your homework." and the emotional texts `;)` make me feel uneasy over the time, especially the final words "I'll just go ahead and redirect you to /dev/null ;)" So I write an email as a public report to the CoC since I'm not sure how to proceed to comment the community patches because I could get offence as a result. Thanks, Gao Xiang