From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751890AbdJES43 (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Oct 2017 14:56:29 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f172.google.com ([209.85.192.172]:50344 "EHLO mail-pf0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751421AbdJES41 (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Oct 2017 14:56:27 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QAOLiy0ZY8s6uRLj8k59NQOKBNnBGohaAnBRw7R4ftZU69tvjUlVwqbxW3Kfz8f0EIaaFhPGg== Subject: Re: [PATCH] block/laptop_mode: Convert timers to use timer_setup() To: Kees Cook Cc: LKML , Michal Hocko , Andrew Morton , Jan Kara , Johannes Weiner , Nicholas Piggin , Vladimir Davydov , Matthew Wilcox , Jeff Layton , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Linux-MM , Thomas Gleixner References: <20171005004924.GA23053@beast> <4d4ccf50-d0b6-a525-dc73-0d64d26da68a@kernel.dk> <57ad0ef1-e147-8507-9922-aa72ad47350e@kernel.dk> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <57556968-319c-b259-d8a7-164e6e6600a8@kernel.dk> Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:56:23 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/05/2017 12:49 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> Honestly, I think the change should have waited for 4.15 in that case. >> Why the rush? It wasn't ready for the merge window. > > My understanding from my discussion with tglx was that if the API > change waiting for 4.15, then the conversions would have to wait until > 4.16. With most conversions only depending on the new API, it seemed > silly to wait another whole release when the work is just waiting to > be merged. Right, it would have shifted everything a release. But that's how we do things! If something isn't ready _before_ the merge window, let alone talking -rc3 time, then it gets to wait unless it's fixing a regression introduced in the merge window. Or if you can argue that it's a really critical fix, sure, it can be squeezed in. I'm puzzled why anyone would think that this is any different. What I'm hearing here is that "I didn't want to wait, and my change is more important than others", as an argument for why this should be treated any differently. I'm not saying the change is bad, it looks trivial, from_timer() discussion aside. But it's not a critical fix, by any stretch of the imagination, and neither are the driver conversions. With this additionally causing extra problems because of the timing, that's just further proof that it should have waited. > But yes, timing was not ideal. I did try to get it in earlier, but I > think tglx was busy with other concerns. So it should have waited... -- Jens Axboe