On Tue, 2014-10-14 at 15:21 +0300, Tanya Brokhman wrote: > Hi Artem/Richard > > I think your discussion here stopped being relevant to this specific > patch but went on to the fastmap feature design in general :) > This patch fixes a real bug in the current implementation of the > feature. What you're discussing requires a re-writing and re-design of > the feature. Perhaps this one can be merged and will be "fixed" later on > when you agree on how you would like FM to access WL data structures in > general?
First of all, "re-writing and re-design of the feature" is an overstatement. So far this is on the "cleaning things up" side of the spectrum, closer to the "re-factoring" area. WRT "merge the fix now and improve later" - this is a good argument for an "inside a company" discussion, where the primary TTM is the driving factor. For the community TTM is a good thing, but quality comes first. Now, if this was about a regression, one could apply time pressure on the maintainer. But we are talking about a problem which was there from day 0. It is completely normal for the maintainer to push back various hot-fixes for the problem and request some reasonable re-factoring first. This is what I do. This is very very usual thing in the Linux community. So far I did not ask anything huge and unreasonable, I think. Just cleaner inter-subsystem APIs, less of the "fastmap uses the other subsystems' internals" kind of things. -- Artem. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
