From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753342Ab3BCKw3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Feb 2013 05:52:29 -0500 Received: from mail-bk0-f52.google.com ([209.85.214.52]:53781 "EHLO mail-bk0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753200Ab3BCKw0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Feb 2013 05:52:26 -0500 Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2013 11:52:21 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andi Kleen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, akpm@linux-foundation.org, acme@redhat.com, eranian@google.com, jolsa@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org, Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] perf, x86: Support the TSX intx/intx_cp qualifiers v3 Message-ID: <20130203105221.GE9330@gmail.com> References: <1359672710-19528-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <1359672710-19528-5-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <20130201101628.GB23061@gmail.com> <20130201150302.GN30577@one.firstfloor.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130201150302.GN30577@one.firstfloor.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andi Kleen wrote: > > As requested before, please keep those in a completely > > separate series so that minimal support can be merged > > upstream. This is > > Hi Ingo, The goal is not to merge "minimal support" but full > support. Stop these idiotic excuses and stop the obstruction already! Firstly, it is long standing kernel maintenance policy to first go for supporting existing applications, ABIs, binaries. The bulks of your other changes need changes to the ABI and changes to tools - and won't be made use of by any of the existing installed base of profiling tooling. It is entirely reasonable and in fact required of me to separate out and handle those in a second wave of changes, and this is the fourth time you hinder Haswell support by not addressing maintainer feedback. Every other perf contributor understands those concepts. Secondly, as it's being demonstrated in this discussion again, you are a historically problematic contributor who often produces avoidably crappy code that needs several iterations to get right. You also have a track record of not willing to improve and you have a track record of being needlessly argumentative and disruptive. All in one, I currently cannot trust your code and refuse to handle long, complex patch series from you. Thanks, Ingo