[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFyhdSADSuc2Honu0HG4zLQ7JtovsiTonfA=Cu70jqrFRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 08:20:36 -1000
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] random: Add support for architectural random hooks
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com> wrote:
>
> Did you even look at these patches?
Umm. My exact point about the email was that we should if anything
change Peter's patch *away* from some kind of abstracted driver
interface. But that was what you were arguing for, and that was what I
was dismissing.
So when you argue for not taking the patches because you want a
generic interface, I tell you that the argument is bogus.
Now, if you now argue that we should make it closer, and not take
Peter's patches for *that* reason, then I'd be in whole-hearted
agreement with you.
Which way is it?
Linus
--
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