From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] ide: locking improvements Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 08:51:43 +0200 Message-ID: <20081009065141.GV19428@kernel.dk> References: <20081008202930.19112.90371.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from pasmtpa.tele.dk ([80.160.77.114]:46726 "EHLO pasmtpA.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752087AbYJIGwP (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2008 02:52:15 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081008202930.19112.90371.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 08 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > Locking improvements in preparation for replacing the global ide_lock > spinlock by per-hwgroup spinlocks [1]. > > [1] patch (which is partially based on 2005 patch from Scalex86) for this > is also ready but it needs some more audit and testing > > diffstat: > drivers/ide/ide-cd.c | 38 ++++++------- > drivers/ide/ide-io.c | 129 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------- > drivers/ide/ide-ioctls.c | 3 - > drivers/ide/ide-lib.c | 7 -- > drivers/ide/ide-proc.c | 25 +-------- > drivers/ide/ide.c | 7 -- > 6 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 129 deletions(-) Sorry, but I just have to ask 'why'? IDE is seeing a whole lot of churn for something that should essentially be a stable code base in maintenance mode, and now scalability improvements? Just doesn't make ANY sense to me, sorry. We may end up with a cleaner code base, but likely also a buggier one. It's not like hardware coverage testing is all that great, considering some of the ancient stuff it supports :-) -- Jens Axboe