linux-kernel - Re: [RFC patch 0/5] genirq: add infrastructure for threaded interrupt handlers

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 03 Oct 2008 07:44:13 -0700
From:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Veen <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>,
	Sven Dietrich <sdietrich@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch 0/5] genirq: add infrastructure for threaded
	interrupt handlers

On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 02:26 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Oct 2008, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 18:28 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > > Why are you bringing up real time in this thread?? The thread has
> > > > > absolutely nothing to do with real time. This thread is about a better
> > > > > way to handle interrupt handlers.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm concerned about the connection between the two, which is what I'm
> > > > commenting on.
> > > 
> > > Well, please take that up separately. Do you see these patches going
> > > into the -rt tree?  No, they are going in mainline. We will deal with
> > > them for -rt when the time comes.
> > 
> > It's an RFC after all, it's not going into anything at this point..
> 
> Because you are deciding what's going into mainline, right ?

You flagged this as an RFC, typically that means it's a work in
progress .. Usually a work in progress does go into mainline.

> > > You are bringing up concerns about mainline changes with something that
> > > is maintained outside the mainline tree.  Changes to mainline have never
> > > been influenced by changes maintained outside of mainline.
> > 
> > Again it's an RFC .. It's not going into mainline.. 
> 
> You made such a statement vs. hrtimers some time ago. 

hrtimers didn't go RFC then straight to mainline either.

> > > Yes Daniel, I know. But this is not a conversation. This is a email thread
> > > that is talking about changes to mainline. The mainline kernel developers
> > > really don't care about any issues that these changes will do to the
> > > real time project. The real time project is a niche, and is currently
> > > outside the mainline tree. Hence, lets stop bothering mainline 
> > > developers with our issues.
> > 
> > Your speaking for a lot of developers.. It's an RFC, it's coming from
> > real time developers, it's real time connected, and this is the real
> > time development list ..
> 
> This RFC patch is from a mainline developer/ maintainer who happens to
> be a real time developer as well.

And is submitting a real time core features.

> Welcome to my real time incoherent nonsense filter

You ask for comments, than get upset when you get some .. If anyone
needs to be filtered it's you.

Daniel

--
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/