From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751710AbZHXIE3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 04:04:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750848AbZHXIE2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 04:04:28 -0400 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([93.163.65.50]:57369 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750756AbZHXIE1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 04:04:27 -0400 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:04:29 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, htejun@gmail.com, bzolnier@gmail.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Lazy workqueues Message-ID: <20090824080429.GC12579@kernel.dk> References: <1250763604-24355-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <1250769861.8282.182.camel@twins> <20090820120858.GJ12579@kernel.dk> <1250770571.8282.186.camel@twins> <7vfxbj1car.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vfxbj1car.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Aug 22 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Peter Zijlstra writes: > > > On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 14:08 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > ... > >> That's pretty new... But perhaps I should complain too, it's been > >> annoying me forever. > > > > http://marc.info/?l=git&m=123457137328461&w=2 > > > > Apparently it didn't happen, nor did I ever see a reply to that posting. > > > > Junio, what happened here? > > Nothing happened. > > I do not recall anybody objecting to, but then when nothing happened in > neither 1.6.3 nor 1.6.4, nobody jumped up-and-down demanding the change of > default either. So overall impression I got from this was that nobody > really cared deeply enough either way. That's some strange logic right there :-). Of course nobody complained, they thought it was a done deal. > But we are talking about 1.7.0 to become a release to correct wrong > defaults we have had once and for all ;-), and I am tempted to roll this > topic into the mix. Here is what I queued to my 'next' branch tonight. OK that's at least something, looking forward to being able to prune that argument from my scripts. It completely destroys viewability of larger patchsets. -- Jens Axboe