From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755349Ab3AaAWr (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2013 19:22:47 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:33272 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751515Ab3AaAWp (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2013 19:22:45 -0500 Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:22:43 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Sasha Levin Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Peter Senna Tschudin , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators Message-Id: <20130130162243.8137c424.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <5109B64D.9050904@oracle.com> References: <1358998645-20452-1-git-send-email-sasha.levin@oracle.com> <5108728E.5020901@oracle.com> <20130130154725.f7b40daa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <5109B64D.9050904@oracle.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 19:09:49 -0500 Sasha Levin wrote: > I would accept a "it's not worth the effort" if you think it's not worth > the effort. I don't recall ever saying that to anything, really. Yes, there are things which make small improvements at large effort costs, but if we rule out an improvement just because it's a lot of work, we suck. I'm particularly relaxed when all that effort is yours and Linus's :) > If not, should I send it over to you on -rc1? Probably that's the way to go, but there's no point in going via my tree on this - put it straight into mainline and we'll have any adverse fallout fixed up pretty soon afterwards. But... how confident can we be that the code is correct? I guess a bit of linux-next testing wouldn't hurt, however applying the v2 patch to current linux-next is not pretty: 1 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file arch/mips/kernel/kprobes.c.rej 4 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c.rej 1 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file block/blk-cgroup.c.rej 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file block/cfq-iosched.c.rej 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file block/elevator.c.rej 1 out of 17 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/clk/clk.c.rej 2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_hw.c.rej 2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c.rej 4 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file kernel/cgroup.c.rej 6 out of 7 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file kernel/workqueue.c.rej 2 out of 8 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file net/batman-adv/bat_iv_ogm.c.rej 11 out of 23 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file net/batman-adv/bridge_loop_avoidance.c.rej 2 out of 15 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file net/batman-adv/originator.c.rej 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file net/batman-adv/routing.c.rej 2 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file net/batman-adv/send.c.rej 2 out of 38 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file net/batman-adv/translation-table.c.rej 4 out of 16 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file net/batman-adv/vis.c.rej 2 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c.rej 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file net/ipv6/inet6_connection_sock.c.rej Hum. Perhaps to move this thing forward you could prepare a diff against current linux-next and I'll see how painful it is to maintain for a month?