From: David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] xbow.c kmalloc fixes
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 18:25:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-106667462922380@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-106641220628729@msgid-missing>
>>>>> On 20 Oct 2003 04:46:03 -0400, Jes Sorensen <jes@wildopensource.com> said:
>>>>> "David" = David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com> writes:
David> So what should be done about these SN2 cleanups? I don't
David> want to accept dozens of small "fixes" (which really are
David> mostly cleanups) as that would defeat the idea of the
David> code-fixes-only decree. On the other hand, I really would
David> like to see the SN2 code cleaned up so we actually have a
David> sane base to do bug fixes on top of.
Jes> I am in two minds over this, I agree that getting the sn2 code
Jes> cleaned up is a big win and a lot of the changes like those I
Jes> posted are clearly bug fixes (not checking kmalloc returns
Jes> should always be fixed). However having a big patch will take
Jes> time and means we will have to operate with an internal tree
Jes> until we get the whole thing into shape to push, but the
Jes> seperate tree is one of the things we have been trying to avoid
Jes> with 2.6. What came first, the chicken or the soft boiled egg
Jes> ;-(
The issue may be moot already. Now that test8 is out, I'm not sure
Andrew/Linus would still accept large at all patches anymore.
--david
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-20 18:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-17 17:31 [patch] xbow.c kmalloc fixes David Mosberger
2003-10-17 17:37 ` Jesse Barnes
2003-10-17 17:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-10-17 20:08 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-17 20:11 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-18 1:17 ` Colin Ngam
2003-10-20 8:34 ` Jes Sorensen
2003-10-20 8:46 ` Jes Sorensen
2003-10-20 18:25 ` David Mosberger [this message]
2003-10-20 18:50 ` Colin Ngam
2003-10-20 20:43 ` David Mosberger
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-10-17 13:04 Jes Sorensen
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=marc-linux-ia64-106667462922380@msgid-missing \
--to=davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.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