Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Jan 2015 00:19:18 -0500
From:      Randy Stewart <randall@lakerest.net>
To:        Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, Kip Macy <kmacy@freebsd.org>, Jason Wolfe <nitroboost@gmail.com>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, Sean Bruno <sbruno@freebsd.org>, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r277213 - in head: share/man/man9 sys/kern sys/ofed/include/linux sys/sys
Message-ID:  <BEEA40C8-0698-4063-9B64-D170578B75D0@lakerest.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmomObs2gMFLCZzXPSu8w7JwommXZ_MZPfRKx3mmHTe3eyw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <20150120075126.GA42409@kib.kiev.ua> <20150120211137.GY15484@FreeBSD.org> <54BED6FB.8060401@selasky.org> <54BEE62D.2060703@ignoranthack.me> <CAHM0Q_MDJN_8sTvTDXfqA7UtJVO3Y8S8%2BNRCs_=6Nj4dkTzjOA@mail.gmail.com> <54BEE8E6.3080009@ignoranthack.me> <CAHM0Q_N_53BM-6RvXu8UpjfDzQHEn5oXZo1Nn8RO0cuOUhe8tg@mail.gmail.com> <54BEEA7F.1070301@ignoranthack.me> <CAHM0Q_PtJ7JHFTiu9_dmi_Ce=rmu1j72z2OYQ2CD3%2BEbcoEGsA@mail.gmail.com> <54BEF154.3030606@ignoranthack.me> <20150121181512.GE15484@FreeBSD.org> <CAJ-VmokyKX0uCA1%2B3KjziJkokDOVBCpUdwHQcVaY=buwa%2BqfhQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHM0Q_NJDq41MtDAne0a-fnp%2BOg38=ypNKRidq5cAeL=nj-YDQ@mail.gmail.com> <B4F512FF-5AD8-4885-9ABF-CEAB54561F92@bsdimp.com> <CAHM0Q_M%2BKkiGOxMcFjZD-Sqxu6bzY_AvGbJHsadbFAgPvbM55Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmomObs2gMFLCZzXPSu8w7JwommXZ_MZPfRKx3mmHTe3eyw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
All:

I have finally pulled my head out of the sands of TLS and=20
had some time to look at this interesting long thread. I agree
with Warner and Adrian on this.. Lets back it out
and then in a branch chew this over piece by piece..

R
> On Jan 21, 2015, at 7:10 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote:
>=20
> On 21 January 2015 at 16:07, K. Macy <kmacy@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>> HPS: Your change failed to meet these guidelines. Some of us are =
upset
>>>> because these guidelines are fairly fundamental for the on-going
>>>> viability of FreeBSD. Due to linguistic / time zone / cultural
>>>> differences these expectations have not been adequately =
communicated
>>>> to you. You are not in the USB sandbox where others need for your
>>>> support outweighs the inconvenience of random breakage.
>>>>=20
>>>> It sounds like you are making progress towards updating the =
concerns
>>>> that have been voiced. If kib's observations are in fact =
comprehensive
>>>> then adding a callout_init_cpu function and updating all clients so
>>>> that their callouts continue to be scheduled on a CPU other than =
the
>>>> BSP will suffice and we can all move on.
>>>=20
>>> Is there some reason that we can=E2=80=99t back things out, break =
things down into
>>> smaller pieces and have everything pass through phabric with a wide
>>> ranging review? Given the fundamental nature of these changes, they
>>> really need better review and doing it after the fact seems to be to =
be
>>> too risky. I=E2=80=99m not debating that this =E2=80=9Cfixes=E2=80=9D =
some issues, but given the
>>> performance regression, it sure seems like we may need a different
>>> solution to be implemented and hashing that out in a branch might be
>>> the best approach.
>>=20
>> Thank you. A more incremental approach would be appreciated by many =
of
>> us. To avoid the bystander effect we can permit explicit timeouts for
>> review-to-commit (72 hours?) so that we don't collectively end up
>> sandbagging him.
>=20
> I'm +1 for this.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -a
>=20
>=20

-----
Randall Stewart
randall@lakerest.net







Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BEEA40C8-0698-4063-9B64-D170578B75D0>