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 02/10] libata-pmp: implement Port Multiplier support Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 06/10] sata_sil24: implement PMP support Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 07/10] sata_sil24: implement PORT_RST 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 03/10] libata-pmp: hook PMP support and enable it Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 08/10] ahci: 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 10/10] ahci: implement AHCI_HFLAG_NO_PMP Tejun Heo
2007-09-23 4:19 ` [PATCH 09/10] ahci: move host flags over to pi.private_data 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).