From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
niv@us.ibm.com, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, lethal@linux-sh.org,
kernel@wantstofly.org, matthew@wil.cx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] v4 RCU: the bloatwatch edition
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 08:29:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090622082941.c5c8b3f3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090622124951.GB30553@elte.hu>
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:49:51 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > Are you going to push your RCU patch for this merge window?
>
> Andrew needs to be convinced for that to happen.
>
whome? I rarely have firm opinions on anything. iirc the question
here was "is it worth adding another RCU implementation to save 900
bytes"?
I find it pretty hard to see how to come up with "yes" for that one but
it's hardly a huge issue. If you guys feel otherwise then go wild.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-22 15:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-02 16:34 [PATCH] v4 RCU: the bloatwatch edition Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-05 21:18 ` David Howells
2009-05-06 12:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-06 18:24 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-06 19:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-06 19:19 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-06 20:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-06 22:22 ` David Howells
2009-05-06 22:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-22 11:43 ` David Howells
2009-06-22 12:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-22 15:29 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-06-22 16:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-22 16:15 ` David Howells
2009-06-22 18:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-22 16:30 ` Darren Hart
2009-06-22 17:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-23 9:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-23 12:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20090622082941.c5c8b3f3.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kernel@wantstofly.org \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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.