Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266123AbUALPIp (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:08:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266171AbUALPIp (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:08:45 -0500 Received: from mtagate4.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.153]:38899 "EHLO mtagate4.de.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266123AbUALPIj convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:08:39 -0500 Importance: Normal Sensitivity: Subject: Re: smp dead lock of io_request_lock/queue_lock patch To: Jens Axboe Cc: Doug Ledford , Arjan Van de Ven , Peter Yao , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi mailing list , ihno@suse.de X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.12 February 13, 2003 Message-ID: From: "Martin Peschke3" Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:07:40 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D12ML021/12/M/IBM(Release 5.0.9a |January 7, 2002) at 12/01/2004 16:07:42 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2952 Lines: 83 Hi, I understand that people tend to be careful with optimizations or enhancements. In that regard, this particular patch is a disputable example. But, my request has been meant in a broader sense. This iorl-patch is just one out of roughly a dozen on both RH's side and SuSE's side. I have been asking for getting together on the list and trying to match and merge these piles of patches, which are possibly not all as disputable as the patch discussed in this thread, i.e. pure (partially vintage) bugfixes. If people agree in that course also about a clean, common iorl-patch, that would be another step forward, in my opinion. Mit freundlichen Gr??en / with kind regards Martin Peschke IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH Linux for eServer Development Phone: +49-(0)7031-16-2349 Jens Axboe @vger.kernel.org on 12/01/2004 15:13:30 Sent by: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Martin Peschke3/Germany/IBM@IBMDE cc: Doug Ledford , Arjan Van de Ven , Peter Yao , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi mailing list Subject: Re: smp dead lock of io_request_lock/queue_lock patch On Mon, Jan 12 2004, Martin Peschke3 wrote: > Hi, > > is there a way to merge all (or at least the common denominator) of > Redhat's and SuSE's changes into the vanilla 2.4 SCSI stack? > The SCSI part of Marcelo's kernel seems to be rather backlevel, > considering all those fixes and enhancements added by the mentioned > distributors and their SCSI experts. As this discussion underlines, > there are a lot of common problems and sometimes even common > approaches. I am convinced that a number of patches ought to be > incorporated into the mainline kernel. Though, I must admit > that I am at a loss with how this could be achieved given the > unresolved question of 2.4 SCSI maintenance > (which has certainly played a part in building up those piles > of SCSI patches). I have mixed feelings about that. One on side, I'd love to merge the scalability patches in mainline. We've had a significant number of bugs in this area in the past, and it seems a shame that we all have to fix them independently because we deviate from mainline. On the other hand, 2.4 is pretty much closed. There wont be a big number of new distro 2.4 kernels. Had you asked me 6 months ago I probably would have advocated merging them, but right now I think it's a waste of time. -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/