From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1766001AbXGKVQu (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:16:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754469AbXGKVQl (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:16:41 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:42105 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751706AbXGKVQk (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:16:40 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:16:38 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Arjan van de Ven , Linus Torvalds , Chris Wright Subject: Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 Message-ID: <20070711211638.GE18767@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20070710013152.ef2cd200.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070711174252.GA16793@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070711174252.GA16793@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Well I spent a lot of time making the x86-64 timing code work well on a variety of machines; working around a wide variety of hardware and platform bugs. I obviously don't agree on your description of its maintenance state. > What contribution do we have from you instead? A week before the .23 I told him my objections privately earlier. Basically i would like to see an actually debuggable step-by-step change, not a rip everything out. If that isn't possible it needs very careful review which just hasn't happened yet. But I'm not convinced even step by step is not possible here. I thought it was clear that rip everything out is rarely a good idea in Linux land? That's really not something I should need to harp on repeatedly. -Andi