[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070716.155753.34760312.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:57:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: mingo@...e.hu
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
olaf.kirch@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [patch] revert: [NET]: Fix races in net_rx_action vs netpoll
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:37:18 +0200
> I think if you leaned back and thought it through, and if you applied
> this scenario to a bad scheduler commit from me that broke your box,
> you'd readily agree with me =B-) (which scenario is purely hypothetical,
> my scheduler commits are all 100% perfect of course ;-)
Actually I'd probably send you a patch for any bug I found that
triggered on sparc64, since that's faster than asking you to fix a bug
that you are unlikely to be able to trigger on your own systems.
But that's just how I operate.
Ask Thomas Gleixner. Every single hrtimers/nohz bug I've found on
sparc64, I sent him either a full fix or a full analysis of the bug
and a description of exactly what is going on and what needs to be
changed so he can compose the bug fix patch with minimal effort.
I don't ask people to revert, ever. It's never necessary when the
parties involved are extremely competent and responsive.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists