On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Adrian Hunter [off-list ref] wrote:

On 27/10/17 14:25, Linus Walleij wrote:

quoted

It is indeed tough to juggle this with the pressure to "upstream
first" the BFQ scheduler policy that we are working on in Linaro
to increase interactivity. We need to enable this on devices
pronto and that means migrating MMC/SD to MQ and MQ only.
I have shared this motivation since the start, so it should come
as no surprise.

IMHO BFQ is just another example of unnecessary delay.

I do not see it as a delay to anything, it is a motivation for
my work. I am telling you why I am still working on my patch
set, what is driving and motivating it.

I guess CQE is driving and motivating your work?

quoted

So I also have some pressure to "Get This Feature In Now".

It has nothing to do with pressure.  It is about what is reasonable.
Features should go in as soon as they are ready.  Ideally queued up in the
same release cycle they are submitted.  If the code doesn't work right, then
it can't go in straight away, but fake reasons for delaying things needs to
stop.

I don't understand who you are addressing or accusing.

Nobody wants to delay CQE if that is what you are implying,
I want to see it supported as much as you do.

I just prefer to see MQ happen first, and now you say your patch
set does that and that is great, so I just need to review the code
better I guess?

Yours,
Linus Walleij