Yes, consider it an implicit Acked-by. NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote: >On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:39:05 +0100 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> >wrote: > >> Sorry, we cannot share those at this time since the hardwarenis not >yet released. > >Can I take that to imply "Acked-by: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>" >?? > >It would be nice to have at least a statement like: >These patches have been tested both with the user-space testing tool >and in >a RAID6 md array and the pass all test. While we cannot release >performance >numbers as the hardwere is not released, we can confirm that on that >hardware > the performance with these patches is faster than without. > >I guess I should be able to assume that - surely the patches would not >be >posted if it were not true... But I like to avoid assuming when I can. > >Thanks, >NeilBrown > > >> >> Paul Menzel <pm.debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >Dear Jim, >> > >> > >> >Am Donnerstag, den 08.11.2012, 13:47 -0800 schrieb Jim Kukunas: >> >> Optimize RAID6 recovery functions to take advantage of >> >> the 256-bit YMM integer instructions introduced in AVX2. >> > >> >in my experiencing optimizations always have to be back up by >> >benchmarks. Could you add those to the commit message please. >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Jim Kukunas <james.t.kukunas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> >[…] >> > >> > >> >Thanks, >> > >> >Paul >> -- Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
