Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:53:21 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: Partially defer some of the async stuff to the next release
Message-ID: <20090109125321.616d731b@infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901091241470.6528@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20090109070910.233e5f3c@infradead.org>
	<alpine.LFD.2.00.0901091241470.6528@localhost.localdomain>
Organization: Intel
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1349
Lines: 36

On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:42:34 -0800 (PST)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > 
> > I think it's better that we defer some of the asynchronous boot
> > stuff to 2.6.30 so that it can bake in -next for a bit. I would
> > like to keep the core infrastructure in place for 29, so that the
> > various subsystem patches etc can just use it in -next without
> > generating dependencies in the patch flow.
> > 
> > for both libata and the inode delete very simple things can be done
> > to fix them, but I would feel a lot more comfortable giving these a
> > ride in -next.
> 
> Can we rather make this something that people can enable with a
> "fastboot" option and is disabled by default? At least that way the
> ATA people can see the problem, and don't just forget about it, since
> we want it fixed.

ok sure, that's not hard. I'll get that going, hopefully before the end
of the day


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/