From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 15:56:02 +0800 From: Ming Lei To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Bart Van Assche , Jens Axboe , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, "Martin K . Petersen" , =Oleksandr Natalenko , "Luis R . Rodriguez" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/8] block, scsi, md: Improve suspend and resume Message-ID: <20171004075601.GB17729@ming.t460p> References: <20171002225218.18548-1-bart.vanassche@wdc.com> <20171004065607.GA20879@lst.de> <20171004075326.GA17729@ming.t460p> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20171004075326.GA17729@ming.t460p> List-ID: On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:53:28PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 08:56:08AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Bart, Ming: > > > > can you guys please work a little better together? We've now got two > > patchsets that are getting very similar. > > > > Bart, please at least CC Ming when you send out the patches. > > > > Ming - instead of sending a separate series right after Bart a > > differential series would be nice. This also applies the other way > > around if Ming is the first after a while. > > Hi Chritoph, > > Could you take a look at my yesterday's post V8? Which should > address all previous issues? Except for Tejun's comment > about document __percpu_ref_tryget_live() a bit, and I will > do it in V9. > > I have commented on Bart's patchset before, but my comments > never gets addressed: > > 1) no MD changes required on this issue > > 2) RCU read lock is missed in fast path > > 3) bad patch title: > > - such as : 'scsi-mq: Reduce suspend latency' > this is very misleading since it is actually bug fix > > - such as : "Make SCSI device suspend and resume work reliably" > also a bit not accurate Not mention 'block, scsi, md: Improve suspend and resume' in this cover letter, which is really misleading, since this patchset is really bug fix. -- Ming