linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/35] x86, lmb: Add lmb_reserve_area_overlap

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20100515073231.GB9877@elte.hu>
Date:	Sat, 15 May 2010 09:32:31 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@...cle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/35] x86, lmb: Add lmb_reserve_area_overlap_ok()

* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 2010-05-14 at 09:40 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > later, after this patchset. this patchset is hanging around too long
> > already.
> 
> That's where I strongly disagree with Ingo :-) 
> There's no such thing as a patch set hanging around 
> too long. Patches should go in when they are ready 
> and in good shape, not due to some kind of time 
> bomb, which results in tons of unfixable crap being 
> merged, which is very bad engineering.

The thing i disagreed with was that the patches were 
posted in March and there was no progress for a long 
time. That kind of situation only leads to patches 
being piled up unreasonably and results in Yinghai 
wasting time and effort.

But now there's real progress: you posted patches and 
Yinghai is posting patches and is reacting to your 
review feedback. As long there's steady progress (and 
not just the steady decay of entropy destroying 
already created value) i'm a happy camper.

Btw., it would be nice to ready the LMB core bits for 
upstream for 2.6.35 if there's agreement about them - 
that will make the subsequent x86 patches much easier 
to merge.

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/