From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
To: Mark Lord <liml@rtr.ca>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>, Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>,
alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Polling (was Re: [PATCHSET 2/2] implement PMP support, take 6)
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 22:25:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200709282225.36913.bzolnier@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46FD5DE1.8000206@rtr.ca>
On Friday 28 September 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >>> Aieee... Another merge delay. I wish the review process proceeded a bit
> >>> swifter. The patchset has been around literally for years now and
> >>> submitted for review six times if I have the take number right. :-(
> >> Well the vast majority of the patches are in, what five out of six
> >> original patchsets?
> >
> > Yeah, I'm frustrated mainly because I've been telling people that
> > mainline will probably have PMP support when 2.6.24 comes out and it
> > seems we'll miss the merge window again. Oh, well...
> >
> >> Sorry I didn't catch the polling requirement beforehand, it was not
> >> really clear from a quick read.
> >
> > ->pmp_read/write stuff is something which I've been meaning to change
> > anyway. When developing the PMP code, PMP register access while frozen
> > seemed necessary but now I think we can be just as safe without it. I
> > was thinking about changing it after merge because the current code
> > received a lot of testing and I didn't want to destabilize it right
> > before merging.
This is an excellent point for merging the PMP code as it is currently
and doing revamp later. PMP patchset in the current form has got quite
a lot of testing in -mm and "last minute" changes have a tendency to
bring up some nasty surprises.
> > I'll be back home mid next week. I'll try to re-test and re-submit the
> > changes ASAP.
>
> Jeff, seeing as Tejun's commitment is never in doubt here,
> I really believe we should go with the existing PMP patchset
> for 2.6.24 (unless the respin happens quickly enough).
>
> This functionality is way overdue, and we shouldn't be impeding it
> as long as we have been.
It is way, way overdue...
> Tejun will definitely continue to rework the changes you've asked for
> in time for the next release, but let's not hold things up unreasonably here.
Seconded.
Bart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-28 20:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-23 4:19 [PATCHSET 2/2] implement PMP support, take 6 Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 01/10] libata-pmp: update ata_eh_reset() for PMP Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 06/10] sata_sil24: implement PMP support Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 05/10] libata-pmp: implement qc_defer for command switching " Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 02/10] libata-pmp: implement Port Multiplier support Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 04/10] libata-pmp: extend ACPI support to cover PMP Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 07/10] sata_sil24: implement PORT_RST Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 08/10] ahci: implement PMP support Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 03/10] libata-pmp: hook PMP support and enable it Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 09/10] ahci: move host flags over to pi.private_data Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 10/10] ahci: implement AHCI_HFLAG_NO_PMP Tejun Heo
2007-09-26 2:09 ` Polling (was Re: [PATCHSET 2/2] implement PMP support, take 6) Jeff Garzik
2007-09-26 2:12 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-26 8:41 ` Tejun Heo
2007-09-28 12:10 ` Tejun Heo
2007-09-28 13:54 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-28 14:18 ` Tejun Heo
2007-09-28 14:57 ` Alan Cox
2007-09-28 15:20 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-28 15:43 ` Alan Cox
2007-09-28 15:40 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-28 20:00 ` Mark Lord
2007-09-29 1:49 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-29 3:29 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-29 4:58 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-29 5:09 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-29 16:51 ` Greg Freemyer
2007-09-29 20:56 ` Alan Cox
2007-10-01 12:28 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-28 15:22 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-28 16:48 ` Tejun Heo
2007-09-28 20:02 ` Mark Lord
2007-09-28 20:25 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [this message]
2007-09-28 21:03 ` Alan Cox
2007-09-29 1:43 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-29 5:24 ` Tejun Heo
2007-10-01 13:31 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-02 0:11 ` Tejun Heo
2007-10-02 14:25 ` Alan Cox
2007-10-02 14:30 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-29 12:32 ` Mark Lord
2007-10-01 12:38 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-02 0:12 ` Tejun Heo
2007-10-02 12:56 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-02 13:06 ` Mark Lord
2007-10-02 13:30 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-06 22:02 ` Tejun Heo
2007-10-09 2:09 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-10-09 6:54 ` Tejun Heo
2007-09-28 14:20 ` Mark Lord
2007-09-28 15:36 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-28 15:55 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200709282225.36913.bzolnier@gmail.com \
--to=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=liml@rtr.ca \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.