[...] >> 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. Kind regards Uffe
