Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

[Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>]

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:56:03AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:51:49PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:35:23AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > 
> > > BTW, please fix your mailer.  It emits Mail-Followup-To headers that
> > > hijack everyone on the thread into the To field, breaking the normal
> > > LKML To/CC standard replying mechanism that has been working for a
> > > decade.
> > 
> > Sorry, I will not.  My local policy (which I have the utmost right to
> > have) is that I do not wish to be CC'd on responses to replies to my
> > posts.  Additional useless CC's are a waste of my limited bandwidth
> > and resources.
> > 
> > It's a question of local policy required by local resource limitations.
> > 
> > So I give you a choice: you can either have the benefit of me reply and
> > put up with the follow up header, or I will arrange to never reply to
> > your messages ever again (which may involve me never reading one again).
> > Which would you prefer?
> 
> Your personal preference is fine with me.
> 
> Just stop hijacking -everyone else's- preferences along with it.
> 
> A far more community-friendly method that operates within existing email
> standards is to filter out duplicate message ids on your side.

Utterly wrong - you didn't understand the problem.  Please take the time
to read my email.

It's the fact that I _am_ CC'd on replies, so I get one message from LKML
one from the original poster, maybe one via another mailing list if it's
also copied there.  Add that in to the mix of all the other mail hitting
my MTA and the probability for the machine to exhaust it's limited VM is
very high.

Give me a way to stop people CC'ing me on replies and I'll happily remove
the header.  Unfortunately there isn't, so I can't.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of: