From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750708AbWDTLts (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Apr 2006 07:49:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750729AbWDTLtr (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Apr 2006 07:49:47 -0400 Received: from mailout.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:15371 "HELO mailout.stusta.mhn.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750708AbWDTLtr (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Apr 2006 07:49:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:49:46 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: "Randy.Dunlap" Cc: Andi Kleen , discuss@x86-64.org, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH] [6/6] i386: Move CONFIG_DOUBLEFAULT into arch/i386 where it belongs. Message-ID: <20060420114946.GM25047@stusta.de> References: <4444C0EA.mailKK411J5GA@suse.de> <20060418190528.GL11582@stusta.de> <200604182212.13835.ak@suse.de> <20060418190839.3fa53a0f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060418190839.3fa53a0f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 07:08:39PM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 22:12:13 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > > > On Tuesday 18 April 2006 21:05, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 12:35:22PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen > > > >... > > > > > > NAK. > > > submitting a patch that is the revert of a patch that went > > > into Linus' tree just 8 days ago [1], I'd expect at least: > > > - a Cc to the people involved with the patch you are reverting > > > - a note that you are reverting a recent patch in your patch > > > description > > > - an explanation why you disagree with the patch you are reverting > > > > The subject was very clear. i386 options belong into arch/i386. > > Yes, the timing could have been better. Whatever. > > I agree with Andi that it should be moved back to the ix86 Processor > menu, but not where he moved it to. My patch is below. >... I'd still disagree with Andi regarding this point (but it's not a very important issue). My main problem with his patch is still the way he did it - sending a patch reverting a recently included patch with neither discussion before the patch nor mentioning in the patch that it's a revert nor a Cc to the people involved with the patch. cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed