That code needs to be there for non-experimental users later on.
The reason to push it in quickly is so it can get tested and iterated on. Saving a handful of experimental users is not the main benefit.
Kent himself argued otherwise here[1].
And even if that were the case, there's no need to take a stand on trying to get it into the kernel. If he gets booted out of the kernel tree, then the end result is the same for his users: they have to compile their own kernel. So it makes no sense to push this so hard.
[1]: https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/software/general-linux...
I said "main" for a reason. The current users that need to recover data are a part of the picture, but they're a few trees out of the forest.
"Please tell that to the users who lost data." is not arguing against what I said.
> And even if that were the case, there's no need to take a stand on trying to get it into the kernel. If he gets booted out of the kernel tree, then the end result is the same for his users: they have to compile their own kernel. So it makes no sense to push this so hard.
He's not giving an ultimatum here. The goal is to figure out something that works for everyone.
Testing and iterating on code does not require making exceptions to the kernel development schedule.
I don't know what the best solution is, but it looks like it requires either exceptions or something else that gets around the schedule.
To stabilize the filesystem he needs to iterate on the code that has been there for a while, to add more debugging and fallbacks for error situations. In this case he wanted to add a new fallback.