[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <91042c66d0e8fd6cb0b3baf0325bc1f8340738a3.camel@perches.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 16:43:08 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>, Tim.Bird@...y.com
Cc: shuah@...nel.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com,
kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, frowand.list@...il.com,
sboyd@...nel.org, pmladek@...e.com, sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, rdunlap@...radead.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kunit: fix failure to build without printk
On Fri, 2019-08-30 at 16:37 -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> I thought you and Joe were arguing that "Joe's" resulted in a smaller
> object size than "Mine" (not to be confused with the actual patch I
> presented here, which is what Sergey suggested I do on a different
> thread).
>
> I really don't feel strongly about what Sergey suggested I do (which is
> what this patch originally introduced), versus, what Joe suggested,
> versus what I suggested in response to Joe (or any of the things
> suggested on other threads). I just want to pick one, fix the breakage
> in linux-next, and move on with my life.
Well, if we are voting, I vote for mine! ;)
cheers, Joe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists