From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Hancock Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] ide: locking improvements Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 19:38:55 -0600 Message-ID: <48F1552F.7090600@shaw.ca> References: <200810111756.37278.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20081011175617.GX19428@kernel.dk> <200810112046.23557.bzolnier@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from idcmail-mo1so.shaw.ca ([24.71.223.10]:59499 "EHLO idcmail-mo1so.shaw.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751261AbYJLBjE (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:39:04 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200810112046.23557.bzolnier@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Jens Axboe , petkovbb@gmail.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > The work has already been done and it is a wortwhile work. The risk is > quite low (this is the statement based on rather deep understanding of > IDE subsystem, the complete audit of all code-paths affected and all the > testing experiences from Scalex86/me). > > Moreover the patch won't be merged after few months of extra testing. > > I feel that you still keep on questioning the point of improving IDE > and insist on putting it into "bug-fixes only" mode. If this is really > the case I'm completely uninterested in discussing it any further. What, exactly, is the point of making more than bug-fix-only changes to the IDE code today, when we have libata around which is a much better code base to work from? I'm afraid it still escapes me. I don't mean to denigrate the work that you and other people working on IDE are doing, but can't help but think there would be more productive outlets for it..