Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Jan 2006 12:48:58 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] SMP alternatives |
| |
On Čt 26-01-06 12:17:26, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > >> Can you include the patch in -mm to give it some testing? Then merge > >> maybe for 2.6.17? Posted last time in december, with nobody complaining > >> any more about the most recent version. The patch is almost unmodified > >> since, I've only had to add a small chunk due to the mutex merge. > >> Description is below, the patch (against -rc1-git4 snapshot) is > >> attached. > > > > Well, I'm not 100% convinced this is really good idea.. It increases > > complexity quite a lot. > > Well, we have alternatives for quite some time already, this is just an > extension of the existing bits ...
Like... during suspend we hot-unplug all but one cpu. Patching code at that point is quite unneccessary...
> > Oh and please inline patches. > > Whats wrong with "Content-Disposition: inline" attachments? The risk > they get whitespace-mangeled is much lower then. Also mailers display > them inline and also quote them on reply so you can easily comment them. > At least mutt and thunderbird do that. If your mailer doesn't file a > bug ;)
Consensus on lkml is to inline patches. Content-disposition: inline is commonly accepted as not-too-evil, and my mailer (mutt) usually honours that, but something in your mail tripped it.
Pavel -- Thanks, Sharp! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |