From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753994AbYJBMyZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Oct 2008 08:54:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753273AbYJBMyQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Oct 2008 08:54:16 -0400 Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.171.30]:43250 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753249AbYJBMyP (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Oct 2008 08:54:15 -0400 Message-ID: <48E4C488.9020408@sgi.com> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 05:54:32 -0700 From: Mike Travis User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rusty Russell CC: Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , David Miller , Yinghai Lu , Thomas Gleixner , Jack Steiner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/31] cpumask: Documentation References: <20080929180250.111209000@polaris-admin.engr.sgi.com> <200810010849.46874.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <20081001091325.GA12503@elte.hu> <200810021036.29054.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200810021036.29054.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Rusty Russell wrote: > On Wednesday 01 October 2008 19:13:25 Ingo Molnar wrote: >> that looks very sane to me. > > Thanks, it's reasonably nice. The task of hitting all those cpumask_t users > is big, and I don't think we can do it in one hit. > >> one small request: >>> I'll commit these to my quilt series today. >> IMHO, an infrastructure change of this magnitude should absolutely be >> done via the Git space. This needs a ton of testing and needs bisection, >> a real Git track record, etc. > > Not yet. Committing untested patches into git is the enemy of bisection; if > one of my patches breaks an architecture, they lose the ability to bisect > until its fixed. If it's a series of patches, we can go back and fix it. > > Now, once it's been tested a little, it's better for you to git-ize it and > I'll send you patches instead. But I want some more people banging on it, > and a run through linux-next first... > > If Mike's happy to work on these as a basis, we should be able to get there > soon; the patches are sitting in my tree at http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/kernel/ > (see rr-latest symlink). Absolutely! I may have my own concerns and preferences but the end goal is far more important. I'll take a look at it today. [My only other pressing matter is convincing Ingo to accept the SCIR driver (or tell me how I need to change it so it is acceptable), so my management is happy... ;-)] > > Thanks, > Rusty. > PS. To emphasize, I haven't actually *booted* this kernel. My test machines > are still in transit as I move (and ADSL not connected yet... Grr...) Since our approaches are not different in concept, I can assure you that it works... ;-) And as Ingo and others have noted, the infrastructure is easy to verify, it's the allocation of the temporary cpumasks that will be more difficult to test. Cheers, Mike