On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 14:06 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > Am 29.01.2013 16:55, schrieb Bryn M. Reeves: > > Again, unless you have very different storage controllers this will not break. > > > > I really don't want or need every FC HBA kernel module, firmware bin file or other junk in my laptop initramfs > > "just in case" I happen to swap the disk to a laptop with built-in fibre-channel :-) > The proposal not seem to be a significant performance enhancer. <snip> This is just what I was going to ask for: numbers. I don't see how we can make a reasoned decision on a feature whose primary stated basis is 'performance', when said feature provides zero data on the claimed performance improvement. Per Lennart's mail it seems Chris' attempt is flawed, but at least he made an attempt. Perhaps the feature proposers could take the time to provide some numbers, taking Lennart's feedback into account? The onus would appear to be on them. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
