From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Sun Sep 20 01:38:47 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46636A0359A; Sun, 20 Sep 2015 01:38:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ig0-x22f.google.com (mail-ig0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 043DA123E; Sun, 20 Sep 2015 01:38:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: by igcrk20 with SMTP id rk20so40709373igc.1; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 18:38:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=pmCJiqZRHMfQ8WEJwLnLJBOFRAZKZMp3TlBYxNazuvk=; b=n4TMe3a5JK+kB7TEWIHtkxkk3B4a2tem0l6cC2CQSaBuorfof+Cm6Hk+b0dXQFamfG jaPoo0SRcJuhsRAPJeX9bB1kscVyM0tx726UZItDt4E72C/PR74bIySRWxBPn9NtEgy0 HNjQBxIpHsAKCaiASMmrqo0Wokoa5FKmHErTy0iJJlFsWvqouNYuGloDfl2ZZF/0lgUd S2SD//tpF2WrU1zsW/2cC8n+ENFuGpVjjJ1N07mUlpZWEAlyz+qqnET2a7mwItICDGlQ 2xcM/HAMus7/aWeAddEPNdMzXvXVumbH6q+kmoyR+xWV9dBro3hzz6F1aHsW8Ed4RpNd cX2Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.43.227 with SMTP id z3mr4750952igl.22.1442713126165; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 18:38:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.28.208 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 18:38:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55FDA1E7.8050007@fastmail.net> References: <201509141052.t8EAqRWf008293@repo.freebsd.org> <20150916220559.GS1023@FreeBSD.org> <55FA69BD.10507@selasky.org> <0952027A-5276-487D-99B8-74747B0EEF5D@FreeBSD.org> <55FD23C5.5010008@selasky.org> <64D8263B-1F5D-40E5-994C-479C39B69DC9@neville-neil.com> <1442684369.1224.179.camel@freebsd.org> <55FDA1E7.8050007@fastmail.net> Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 18:38:46 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r287780 - in head: share/man/man9 sys/kern sys/sys From: Adrian Chadd To: Bruce Simpson Cc: Ian Lepore , George Neville-Neil , Hans Petter Selasky , David Chisnall , Gleb Smirnoff , "src-committers@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 01:38:47 -0000 On 19 September 2015 at 10:56, Bruce Simpson wrote: > Ian, > > To paraphrase what I said privately to the various dramatis personae in > January: > > Changes like this need to be reviewed before they go in. As timing is > central to the entire OS, change review has to be meticulous, on par with > the virtual memory management. We have a VM tsar; we do not have a timing > tsar. > > On 19/09/15 18:39, Ian Lepore wrote: >> >> I'm afraid this message can be interpetted as "reviews are now mandatory >> for a 'core component of the system' (whatever that means)". If so, >> this would be a Big Change from the last thing I heard about code >> reviews, which was basically: as much as some people would like it to be >> so, they are not mandatory. > > ... >> >> a definition as meaningless and vague as[.] > > > I don't believe for one moment that George is advocating for mandatory > reviews. But common sense should apply, _as timing is central to the entire > OS_. It touches absolutely everything. > > Hell, I wouldn't feel comfortable checking anything in to e.g. timecounters > without at least running it by phk first. > > So, +1 from me for backout until the change can be reviewed. > > But to be fair to all involved, perhaps Hans should set out a timeline for > how he wants to proceed, subject to the jitter inherent to an all-volunteer > project. What isn't necessarily public knowledge is the sheer volume of emails that went out a few months ago whilst chasing down callout and tcp bugs. There were (and maybe still are) very subtle bugs in the callout system and after a few attempts at fixing them there were some very careful bug fixes made. Some attempts failed, I think a couple of successful ones made it into the tree. Yes, this whole callout system is very delicate at the moment. hps@ has some very specific ideas of how the API should behave in order to be predictable/reasoning-able (and I agree with him about almost all of it, even though it makes RSS painful, but that's because of our TCP stack and how we use callouts, not because its his fault!) but it's a pretty big fundamental change to how things currently work and he was shot down. I think people are just very weary of new changes. On the flip side, he did actively solicit reviews - rrs, kib, hiren, jhb, wblock and jch were included in the review request, which dates back to August 28. He gave people a little short of three weeks for review before he committed the code. So as much as I'm cautious about things (and it gets me in trouble at work, hi alfred!) I think he did the right thing here - he added a new thing, documented it, solicited a review, and it timed out. If people would like more time to review it then fine, but please give him either a firm "no, not ever" right now and be honest about your intentions, or give him a timeframe that you'll review it before it times out. Hans - personally, I think you should've emailed out a review request on freebsd-arch@ and put out a request for testers and give a firm date that you'll commit it. That makes it all very explicit. People channel phrases involving silence and agreement and all that; this is one of those times it happened. -adrian