From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: James Simmons <jsimmons@infradead.org>
Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>, Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>,
Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lustre <lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/19] staging: lustre: discard cfs_time_seconds()
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 09:24:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180109082447.GA13112@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.21.1801081708220.9942@casper.infradead.org>
On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 06:04:33PM +0000, James Simmons wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 04:52:35PM +0000, James Simmons wrote:
> > >
> > > > cfs_time_seconds() converts a number of seconds to the
> > > > matching number of jiffies.
> > > > The standard way to do this in Linux is "* HZ".
> > > > So discard cfs_time_seconds() and use "* HZ" instead.
> > >
> > > Just to make you aware I have been working for several months on
> > > moving lustre away from using jiffies as much as possible. The
> > > problem with using HZ is that it can vary. So when you have a
> > > parallel file system with batches of nodes that have different
> > > values of HZ you can get very interesting corner cases. So I have
> > > been moving everything over to time64_t and ktime. Also I mostly
> > > have killed off the cfs_time_shift* and crap as well. You see all
> > > work under https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-9019. So many
> > > of the cases you did below don't event exist any more. I was
> > > planning to push those changes after the next merge window.
> >
> > First patch to me "wins", none of this "don't touch this code because
> > I'm going to work on it in the future" stuff. That has been documented
> > to kill contributions and in one case, a whole opensource kernel
> > project.
> >
> > So Neil's patches should be evaluated first, don't develop behind closed
> > walls like you are doing
>
> What I'm saying is my work had been tested and various bugs have
> been worked out before it gets to you. His work is new and untested. His
> work can be evaluated first but that doesn't mean it ready to land first.
> The wait event changes is a pretty big change that can have unseen
> consequences.
And how in the world am I supposed to know that your work is somehow
better than his? I don't see your work in my inbox at all, so am I
supposed to just guess?
Come on, you all know how kernel development works, and it sure isn't
this way.
> > I've merged almost all of them now, except for the ones that broke the
> > build :)
>
> He just posted a updated the version of the l_wait_event changes a few
> hours ago based on feed back. Please give it more than a few hours to
> bake. I like to test them to make sure things don't break. I hate to
> find out it breaks things and have it reverted. Please.
reverts are trivial, delaying patch acceptance for no good reason is
not.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-09 8:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-08 3:28 [PATCH 5 v2: 00/19] staging: lustre: use standard wait_event macros NeilBrown
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 06/19] staging: lustre: introduce and use l_wait_event_abortable() NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:30 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 17/19] staging: lustre: remove l_wait_event from ptlrpc_set_wait NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:36 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 02/19] staging: lustre: discard SVC_SIGNAL and related functions NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:26 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 07/19] staging: lustre: simplify l_wait_event when intr handler but no timeout NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:29 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 10/19] staging: lustre: simplify waiting in ptlrpc_invalidate_import() NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:32 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 03/19] staging: lustre: replace simple cases of l_wait_event() with wait_event() NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:27 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 14/19] staging: lustre: improve waiting in sptlrpc_req_refresh_ctx NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:34 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 05/19] staging: lustre: use wait_event_idle_timeout() where appropriate NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:27 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 01/19] sched/wait: add wait_event_idle() functions NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:26 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 09/19] staging: lustre: open code polling loop instead of using l_wait_event() NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:32 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 12/19] staging: lustre: make polling loop in ptlrpc_unregister_bulk more obvious NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:33 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 11/19] staging: lustre: remove back_to_sleep() NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:33 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 13/19] staging: lustre: use wait_event_idle_timeout in ptlrpcd() NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:34 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 04/19] staging: lustre: discard cfs_time_seconds() NeilBrown
2018-01-08 16:52 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 17:00 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-01-08 18:04 ` James Simmons
2018-01-09 8:24 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2018-01-17 15:29 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 08/19] staging: lustre: simplify waiting in ldlm_completion_ast() NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:31 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 15/19] staging: lustre: use explicit poll loop in ptlrpc_service_unlink_rqbd NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:35 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 16/19] staging: lustre: use explicit poll loop in ptlrpc_unregister_reply NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:35 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 18/19] staging: lustre: replace l_wait_event_exclusive_head() with wait_event_idle_exclusive NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:36 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 3:28 ` [PATCH 19/19] staging: lustre: remove l_wait_event() and related code NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:36 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 14:59 ` [PATCH 5 v2: 00/19] staging: lustre: use standard wait_event macros Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-01-08 16:21 ` James Simmons
2018-01-08 16:36 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-01-08 18:06 ` James Simmons
2018-01-09 8:25 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-01-09 1:44 ` NeilBrown
2018-01-17 15:24 ` James Simmons
2018-02-12 21:22 [PATCH 00/19] RESEND " NeilBrown
2018-02-12 21:22 ` [PATCH 04/19] staging: lustre: discard cfs_time_seconds() NeilBrown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180109082447.GA13112@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=andreas.dilger@intel.com \
--cc=jsimmons@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=oleg.drokin@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).