From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86_64: fix sched_clock()
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 13:20:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070525112020.GN8094@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070525101248.GA7547@elte.hu>
On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 12:12:48PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
>
> > > please indicate that you've picked up my style cleanups, i dont want
> > > to redo all this a few days/weeks down the line ...
> >
> > It's done slightly differently now due to conflicting earlier changes,
> > but the end result should be about what you intended. [...]
>
> please send me your current sched-clock.c, i'll redo any remaining
> cleanups.
It needs at least one new preliminary patch (to add on_cpu_single);
please get the series from
ftp://ftp.firstfloor.org/pub/ak/x86_64/quilt/patches-2.6.22-rc2-git7-070525-1.tar.gz
You need at least tsc-unstable upto paravirt-add-a-sched_clock-paravirt
for everything
> But ... i find your approach curious, why didnt you just apply the
> cleanups i sent? You clearly started working on this as a reaction to my
> cleanup patches and to the bugfixes i sent ontop of the cleanup patches.
> Your "I'll do this differently" approach is totally unnecessary from a
> commit management point of view (this is new code after all and
> will/should go upstream in a single clean chunk anyway), the only effect
> this has is that that you are discouraging contributors like me from
> contributing cleanups to the x86_64 tree.
Unfortunately right now it is a already a set of patches; e.g. due to
the paravirt ops change. I can merge back the cleanup change; but
kept it separately due to your earlier complaint about not using
your patch. I think one hunk of your original one is still in there :-)
> so to me the impression is
> that deep in yourself you are (subconsciously) not happy about others
> contributing to the x86_64 tree. Please tell me that i'm wrong :-(
You're reading too much into that. Of course I value contributions
to x86-64, including cleanups. In general when I don't like it I complain
so saying nothing is approval (or me being not reading email, but that
doesn't happen that often)
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-25 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-25 7:10 [patch] sched_clock(): cleanups Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 7:22 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-25 7:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 7:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 7:35 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-25 7:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-05-25 7:58 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 8:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 8:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-05-25 8:21 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 7:38 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 7:31 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 7:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 7:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 7:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 7:54 ` [patch] x86_64: fix sched_clock() Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 8:02 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 8:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 8:20 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 8:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 8:41 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 8:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 8:45 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 8:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 8:55 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-25 9:03 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 9:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 9:46 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 10:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 11:20 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2007-05-25 11:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 11:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 11:46 ` [patch] sched_clock: fix preempt count imbalance Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 11:50 ` [patch] sched_clock(): cleanups, #2 Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 11:55 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 12:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 12:15 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 16:17 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-25 16:26 ` Daniel Walker
2007-05-25 16:33 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 16:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-25 18:08 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 19:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 19:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-25 10:27 ` [patch] x86_64: fix sched_clock() Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 11:05 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-28 3:12 ` Rusty Russell
2007-05-25 8:08 ` [patch] i386, numaq: enable TSCs again Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 8:19 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-25 8:22 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-25 8:25 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-25 8:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 8:38 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-25 8:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 18:16 ` Dave Hansen
2007-05-25 18:23 ` john stultz
2007-05-25 8:15 ` [patch] x86_64: fix sched_clock() Peter Zijlstra
2007-05-25 8:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 8:22 ` [patch] sched_clock(): cleanups Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070525112020.GN8094@one.firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=satyam.sharma@gmail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.