From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
niv@us.ibm.com, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, lethal@linux-sh.org,
kernel@wantstofly.org, matthew@wil.cx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] v4 RCU: the bloatwatch edition
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 08:29:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090622082941.c5c8b3f3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090622124951.GB30553@elte.hu>
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:49:51 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > Are you going to push your RCU patch for this merge window?
>
> Andrew needs to be convinced for that to happen.
>
whome? I rarely have firm opinions on anything. iirc the question
here was "is it worth adding another RCU implementation to save 900
bytes"?
I find it pretty hard to see how to come up with "yes" for that one but
it's hardly a huge issue. If you guys feel otherwise then go wild.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-22 15:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-02 16:34 [PATCH] v4 RCU: the bloatwatch edition Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-05 21:18 ` David Howells
2009-05-06 12:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-06 18:24 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-06 19:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-06 19:19 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-06 20:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-06 22:22 ` David Howells
2009-05-06 22:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-22 11:43 ` David Howells
2009-06-22 12:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-22 15:29 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-06-22 16:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-22 16:15 ` David Howells
2009-06-22 18:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-22 16:30 ` Darren Hart
2009-06-22 17:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-23 9:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-23 12:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20090622082941.c5c8b3f3.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kernel@wantstofly.org \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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