From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932241AbdJXJ0x (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Oct 2017 05:26:53 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:14283 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932189AbdJXJ0u (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Oct 2017 05:26:50 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.43,427,1503385200"; d="scan'208";a="1209362174" Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support To: Ulf Hansson Cc: linux-mmc , linux-block , linux-kernel , Bough Chen , Alex Lemberg , Mateusz Nowak , Yuliy Izrailov , Jaehoon Chung , Dong Aisheng , Das Asutosh , Zhangfei Gao , Sahitya Tummala , Harjani Ritesh , Venu Byravarasu , Linus Walleij , Shawn Lin , Christoph Hellwig , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz References: <1505302814-19313-1-git-send-email-adrian.hunter@intel.com> <2cd4c5fc-cc04-ba44-bea6-4547d84de3e2@intel.com> <9a789f9b-a8c4-8ae7-8f93-0d76f674bded@intel.com> <1b8bec1b-7340-cb89-65c0-e09b17037ca4@intel.com> <376e4bb9-cc86-36ae-91b6-48fef69e059a@intel.com> <0e1f4dd2-2ab6-115b-11fd-72c3be3c61a8@intel.com> <14a149bb-32a8-cd78-e8b7-42dd89bbe5b1@intel.com> <2ff0a8ab-62dd-d46f-8554-2b8214a78740@intel.com> From: Adrian Hunter Organization: Intel Finland Oy, Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki, Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4, Domiciled in Helsinki Message-ID: <2d5c60f4-af72-8f68-f581-81ba376301e4@intel.com> Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 12:11:25 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 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 24/10/17 10:39, Ulf Hansson wrote: > [...] > >>> However, you have completely ignored mine, Linus and Bartlomiej's >>> comments about that we want the blkmq port being a separate patch(es) >>> and then make the CMDQ patches on top. This worries me, because it >>> seems like our messages don't reach you. >> >> Rubbish! I gave a very good reason for keeping the CQE code in - it is >> designed to work together. I also pointed out that it is trivial to see the >> CQE code and that it is all '+' lines anyway. > > You gave reasons, but none of us bought them. > >> >> But not one question in response! Where is a single example of why it is >> difficult like it is. Where are the questions! Not even a request for >> documentation! How I am supposed to know what you do or don't understand if >> you don't ask any questions! There is no evidence that you guys have read a >> single line! > > I have and I have also tested it, finding it not working. As reported. > > However, I have also told you that I am having a *hard time* to review > it, because it implements both blkmq and CMDQ in the same patch to > code changes get complex. > >> >> So, what are your plans for the patches? What don't you understand? > > I have told you this several time, so has Linus and Bartlomiej. > > If you can split it up such the blkmq support comes first, then I can > review/test and pick it up. I have done the split, but of course the code is just the same.