Re: [PATCH] Promise 'stex' driver

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> If I thought that it would ever be updated to use block tagging, I would
>>> not care at all. The motivation to add it from the Promise end would be
>>> zero, as it doesn't really bring any immediate improvements for them. So
>>> it would have to be done by someone else, which means me or you. I don't
>>> have the hardware to actually test it, so unless you do and would want
>>> to do it, chances are looking slim :-)
>>>
>>> It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem, unfortunately. The block layer
>>> tagging _should_ be _the_ way to do it, and as such could be labelled a
>>> requirement. I know that's a bit harsh for the Promise folks, but
>>> unfortunately someone has to pay the price...
>> I think it's highly rude to presume that someone who has so-far been 
>> responsive, and responsible, will suddenly not be so.  That is not the 
>> way to encourage vendors to join the Linux process.
>>
>> They set up an alias for Linux maintainer stuff and have been acting 
>> like a maintainer that will stick around.  Why punish them for good 
>> behavior?
>>
> 
> I'm not trying to be rude to annyone, sorry if that is the impression
> you got. I'm just looking at things realistically - the fact is that
> moving to block layer tagging is not something that will benefit
> Promise, so it'd be fairly low on their agenda of things to do. I don't
> mean that in any rude sense, I can completely understand that position.
> Why would you want to change something that works?  Hence it's
> reasonable to assume that eg you or I would eventually have to convert
> it.

Did you read the patch that started this thread?  Promise has already 
demonstrated they are willing to add changes requested by the community, 
on top of an already-working driver.

	Jeff