svn commit: r277213 - in head: share/man/man9 sys/kern sys/ofed/include/linux sys/sys

[K. Macy]

>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>
> Is there some reason that we can’t 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’m not debating that this “fixes” 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.

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.


-K