Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 28 Jan 2007 22:26:18 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/6] MSI portability cleanups |
| |
* Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
> I'm not arguing against an operations based approach. I'm arguing for > simple obviously correct steps, and not throwing the baby out with the > bath water. > > My patches should be a precursor to an operations based approach > because they are simple step from where we are now.
yeah. I'd say your approach is to go from A to B:
[A] -----------------------------------------------------> [B] | [C]
while there might be some other arguments that "no, lets go to C instead", i say lets not throw away the already implemented and already working and nicely layered [A]->[B] transition, just because there's an argument whether the end result should be 'B' or 'C'. Unless someone who wants to see 'C' produces a patchset that walks the whole way i dont see any reason to not go with your patchset. It clearly removes alot of cruft.
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Ingo - 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/
| |