Jens Axboe wrote:
On Thu, Jul 20 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Jens Axboe wrote:
If I thought that it would ever be updated to use block tagging, I would
not care at all. The motivation to add it from the Promise end would be
zero, as it doesn't really bring any immediate improvements for them. So
it would have to be done by someone else, which means me or you. I don't
have the hardware to actually test it, so unless you do and would want
to do it, chances are looking slim :-)
It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem, unfortunately. The block layer
tagging _should_ be _the_ way to do it, and as such could be labelled a
requirement. I know that's a bit harsh for the Promise folks, but
unfortunately someone has to pay the price...
I think it's highly rude to presume that someone who has so-far been
responsive, and responsible, will suddenly not be so. That is not the
way to encourage vendors to join the Linux process.
They set up an alias for Linux maintainer stuff and have been acting
like a maintainer that will stick around. Why punish them for good
behavior?
I'm not trying to be rude to annyone, sorry if that is the impression
you got. I'm just looking at things realistically - the fact is that
moving to block layer tagging is not something that will benefit
Promise, so it'd be fairly low on their agenda of things to do. I don't
mean that in any rude sense, I can completely understand that position.
Why would you want to change something that works? Hence it's
reasonable to assume that eg you or I would eventually have to convert
it.
Did you read the patch that started this thread? Promise has already
demonstrated they are willing to add changes requested by the community,
on top of an already-working driver.
Jeff
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
