Re: Polling (was Re: [PATCHSET 2/2] implement PMP support, take 6)

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Tejun Heo wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> Is this NACK on the patchset or can we update PMP access later?
>> Sorry, yes, it is a NAK:  polling should not be requirement.
>>
>> I considered making multi-protocol ->qc_issue() a requirement too, but
>> that seemed like it might delay things too much.  But consider this a
>> strong to-do item...  ->pmp_read and ->pmp_write hooks should be folded
>> into ->qc_issue and ata_qc_complete(), because quite often a PMP
>> read/write packet can be delivered just like any other packet.  We want
>> a single "submit packet to hardware" interface, not multiple ones.
> 
> 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?

Sorry I didn't catch the polling requirement beforehand, it was not 
really clear from a quick read.

	Jeff