From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hideo AOKI Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] [CORE]: adding memory accounting points Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:52:40 -0500 Message-ID: <47793A78.3050100@redhat.com> References: <47775B25.7020401@redhat.com> <47775C20.5010004@redhat.com> <20071230.235806.171376126.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, vladislav.yasevich@hp.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, lksctp-developers@lists.sourceforge.net, tyasui@redhat.com, mhiramat@redhat.com, satoshi.oshima.fk@hitachi.com, billfink@mindspring.com, andi@firstfloor.org, johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, shemminger@linux-foundation.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, yumiko.sugita.yf@hitachi.com, haoki@redhat.com To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:52852 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750935AbXLaSxj (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:53:39 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20071230.235806.171376126.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: David Miller wrote: > This patch would not apply, because is contained changes > present in the first patch, specifically: > And now I see exactly what you did, and it is quite careless. > > You wrote one big patch then tried to split it up by hand. This > proves to me that you did not test the patches individually. Even > worse, you did not even try to apply each patch nor compile the tree > each step along the way as a basic sanity check. Hello David, You are right. Since I felt the patch was big, I divided into three for review. And I mistook during the dividing. > This wastes a lot of my time, as well as the time of other developers > who might want to try out and test your changes. I apologize for wasting your time. > I will fix it up this time, but please do not ever do this again. I really appreciate the fix. And I understood this. Best regards, Hideo -- Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.