On 9/4/24 7:59 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > + Paolo > > On Wed, 4 Sept 2024 at 15:47, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 9/4/24 7:27 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On Tue, 3 Sept 2024 at 17:54, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> Nobody is maintaining this code, and it just falls under the umbrella >>>> of block layer code. But at least mark it as such, in case anyone wants >>>> to care more deeply about it and assume the responsibility of doing so. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> I haven't spoken to Paolo recently (just dropped him an email), but I >>> was under the impression that he intended to keep an eye on the BFQ >>> scheduler. >> >> But he hasn't, it's been a long time since he was involved. I've been >> applying patches on an as-needed basis, but effectively nobody has >> been maintaining it for probably 2 years at this point. > > I don't think we should expect him to do active development, but > rather just to keep an eye on it from maintenance point of view. I never expect active development, there may not be a need for it. But basic maintenance is definitely the maintainers role. As that hasn't been happening for quite a while, I'd consider it orphaned. >>> BTW, why didn't you cc him? >> >> That was an oversight, I think because I haven't seen anything from >> him in a long time to assumed he was awol. > > I looked at the last year or so at the linux-block mailing-list and it > seems most patches for bfq aren't being sent to his email. :-( > > Ohh well, let's see what we can do about this. Surely BFQ is being > used out there, so it would really be a pity if nobody takes good care > of it. Probably not a whole lot I think, at least on the prod side experiences with BFQ haven't been good. So there's definitely fixes to do, and I was happy to see fixes being sent in recently to address some concerns. Someone with actual customers using it and finding issues, or someone actually using it. -- Jens Axboe
