We understand being conservative but the code paths only impact on a product that is not yet in market. This is version 10 spanning months with many gaps waiting on review. It's an interesting case study. -- Arie van der Hoeven From: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2022 7:43 AM To: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: linux-block <linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Arie van der Hoeven <arie.vanderhoeven@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Rory Chen <rory.c.chen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Glen Valante <glen.valante@xxxxxxxxxx>; Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 0/8] block, bfq: extend bfq to support multi-actuator drives This message has originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email. On 12/13/22 8:40?AM, Paolo Valente wrote: > Hi Jens, Damien, > can we consider this for 6.2? No, it's too late to queue up for 6.2, even when it was posted on Friday. Bigger changes like that should be in my tree at least a week before the merge window opens, preferably two (or somewhere in between). I already tagged the main 6.2 block changes on Friday, and the pull request has been sent out. -- Jens Axboe Seagate Internal
