From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: use per-cpu recursive lock (v11) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 09:50:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <49E72E83.50702@trash.net> <20090416.153354.170676392.davem@davemloft.net> <20090416234955.GL6924@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090417012812.GA25534@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090418094001.GA2369@ioremap.net> <20090418141455.GA7082@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090420103414.1b4c490f@nehalam> <49ECBE0A.7010303@cosmosbay.com> <18924.59347.375292.102385@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20090420215827.GK6822@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <18924.64032.103954.171918@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20090420160121.268a8226@nehalam> <20090421094350.1e00207a@nehalam> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Paul Mackerras , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Eric Dumazet , Evgeniy Polyakov , David Miller , kaber@trash.net, jeff.chua.linux@gmail.com, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, jengelh@medozas.de, r000n@r000n.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090421094350.1e00207a@nehalam> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Ah a nice day, with Linus giving constructive feedback. Too bad he has > to channel it out of the dark side. I already flamed that patch at least once before. People didn't react. What do I have to do to make people listen? I'm sorry, but I'm not going to send you flowers with a card saying "Hope you do better next time!". I realize that the flowers might be friendlier, but I have absolutely no incentive to be friendly to just bad code. I have even _less_ incentive when my first "that sucks" is apparently totally ignored. So now I spelled it out why it sucks, but I sure as hell didn't have any reason to be polite about it. Linus