[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100322205703.GA25254@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:57:03 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
yinghai@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/20] early_res: seperate common memmap func from e820.c
to fw_memmap.c
* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 10:28 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Note the other side of the coin: LMB appears to be deployed on only 4
> > non-x86 architectures that muster ~1% of the Linux boxes while early_res
> > is deployed on more than 95%.
>
> You use that arguemnt ONE MORE FUCKING TIME and you'll end up in my killfile
> with a auto-NACK reply of anything that looks like a patch from you.
Does this mean you disagree with that? (I think it's pretty factual, last i
checked the usage stats of devel kernels was somewhere around 99.7%.)
In any case, i dont dispute that LMB is a bit cleaner than kernel/early_res.c
- and both are much cleaner than the new e820 kernel/fw_memmap.c code posted
here by Yinghai.
If you dont disagree then please spare me the insults. (or move me into your
killfile)
Thanks,
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