From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [git pull request] ACPI Processor Aggregator Driver for 2.6.32-rc1
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 23:51:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200910052351.53207.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0910051354450.3432@localhost.localdomain>
On Monday 05 October 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > This thing has already been merged, it appears: and it looks like a
> > total breakage of rules to me.
>
> Well, Len pointed out to me that the NAK is kind of pointless, since it
> had no constructive alternatives to the issue. So he left it in as
> documentation, but until the scheduler people can actually _do_ something
> about the problem, their voice doesn't really matter, does it?
Well, for a patch that was objected to so strongly, I think it didn't get
enough review from other relevant people before being pushed upstream.
It looks like Balbir didn't see it before for one example.
It's been lots of time since the patch was originally posted to send it to
the LKML for discussion and so on and to receive some comments that
might help to improve it. I have no idea why that wasn't done and I suspect
there was some corporate pressure on Len to push it upstream as quickly as
possible.
Best,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-05 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-03 5:56 [git pull request] ACPI Processor Aggregator Driver for 2.6.32-rc1 Len Brown
2009-10-03 20:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-10-05 3:32 ` Balbir Singh
2009-10-05 5:33 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-10-05 7:15 ` Balbir Singh
2009-10-05 19:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-10-05 20:33 ` Balbir Singh
2009-10-05 20:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-10-05 21:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2009-10-05 22:17 ` Len Brown
2009-10-05 21:04 ` Andrew Morton
2009-10-05 22:20 ` Len Brown
2009-10-05 22:40 ` Andrew Morton
2009-10-05 23:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-10-06 1:28 ` Len Brown
2009-10-06 9:16 ` Balbir Singh
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=200910052351.53207.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox