[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080227073650.GC4638@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:36:50 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dada1@...mosbay.com,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: include/linux/pcounter.h
* David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > but the main and fundamental question still remains unanswered (more
> > than 3 weeks after Andrew asked that question): why was this piece
> > of general infrastructure merged via net.git and not submitted to
> > lkml ever? The code touching -mm does _not_ count as "review".
>
> I already stated this was a mistake and it won't happen again in the
> future.
sorry - that bit of the thread didnt seem to make it to lkml. I just saw
this incomplete discussion with a denial and with no resolution.
And you did the right thing anyway by thinking in terms of a generic
piece of infrastructure instead of hiding it away into say
include/net/pcounter.h (which nobody could have objected against).
I sometimes think that the forced isolation of subsystems (rather
strongly enforced both by -mm and by linux-next) and their hiding away
on non-lkml lists will eventually hurt the core kernel because less and
less people will be willing to go the trouble of doing proper
cross-subsystem development. That results in duplicated or specialistic
infrastructure, increased code size and longer term, ultimately less
performance. (by the time we notice _that_ it will probably be too late
to do anything about it)
Ingo
--
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