From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Theodore Tso Subject: Re: [PATCH] [2/21] Add blk_q_mask Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:40:24 -0500 Message-ID: <20081116174024.GF6958@mit.edu> References: <200811161211.212948789@firstfloor.org> <20081115231102.54DF53E661A@basil.firstfloor.org> <1226845288.3556.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from www.church-of-our-saviour.ORG ([69.25.196.31]:56436 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753206AbYKQI4i (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Nov 2008 03:56:38 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1226845288.3556.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: Andi Kleen , axboe@kernel.dk, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 08:21:28AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > Could you just pick one? If it's about credit, then the reporting stats > go by Author. All three signoffs will do is inflate your rank in the > Signed-off-by stats (which I suppose we use for the kernel summit), but > I don't think it will give equal credit to the three entities. It also risks annoying the person who collects stats for the kernel summit, who might react if he noticed someone was trying to game the system by arbitrary dividing the person's signed-off stats by 3, or otherwise adjust the statistic so it matches with reality, plus a little extra discount for the annoyance factor. :-) - Ted