[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871rpsdter.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:52:12 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kurt Schwemmer <kurt.schwemmer@...rosemi.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] pci/switchtec: Don't abuse completion wait queue for poll
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com> writes:
> On 2020-03-13 6:23 p.m., Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> I'm in awe at the lack of professionalism in your emails. If you
> bothered to edit out the ad hominems, you might have noticed that nobody
> has yet described how the poll interface fails here (with
> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE) or how replacing one wait queue for another fixes the
> purported problem.
I merily stated an opinion, but if you consider this an ad hominem
attack, then let me ensure you this wasn't my intention and accept my
apology.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists