[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch 0/3] Per cpu relocation to ZERO and x86_32 percpu ops on x86_64

    * Christoph Lameter <> wrote:

    > On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > > if you treat testing and review efforts like that they might have to
    > > wait even longer :-( "My stuff is there somewhere amongst 1415 -mm
    > > patches. Thank you for your interest and buzz off already."
    > Well I guess you have to get used to maintainership I think. F.e. the
    > s390 people tested this patchset without requiring a backport.
    > Typically arch maintainers test mm and do not force the patches back
    > into mainline.

    Huh?? This is getting absurd. Look at it from my perspective: i spent a
    few spare cycles on a Friday afternoon to check a few x86 relevant
    patches that looked interesting to me personally. At the moment they are
    still cooking in -mm and were not submitted to upstream merging yet - so
    i did not expect anything from them, but i wanted to help out because
    the patches looked good.

    This was not any "formal" x86 maintainance activity - your patches are
    still cooking. But i was thinking about maybe putting these patches into
    the x86 test grind to get them shaken out some more the random 1000
    bootup tests a day that it does. When integrating your patches I found a
    bug and tentatively reported it to you, pointing out that it could
    easily be my merge fault. Basically i was offering you to let your
    patches cook in another kitchen as well. I never before had a negative
    response to that :-/

    So i expected some "great that you are looking at this stuff, lemme help
    you sort it out, you missed these 2-3 patches in -mm" reaction (that's
    how i'd have reacted to you doing the same) instead i got these very
    surprising and fundamentlly hostile responses from you, an unfriendly
    "test -mm and dont pick out individual patches" suggestion and now this
    mail from you with this rather subtly formulated condescending tone:

    > Well I guess you have to get used to maintainership I think. [...]

    so i guess i'll leave it here for now with your percpu patches, i've got
    far better things to do on a Friday afternoon :-/ We'll deal with your
    stuff once it gets so far as upstream integration.

    > I am a bit surprised since Andi and I never had this issue.

    huh??? I am really wondering where this hostile attitude of yours comes
    from. Getting patches build and boot is something architecture
    maintainers do on a regular basis, it's a minimum requirement before
    getting something merged into an architecture.

    And btw., -rc3-mm2 seems to have grown a spontaneous reboot problem,
    that looks quite similar to what i saw:

    | - First bug report: after ten minutes happily compiling kernels my
    | 2.6.24-rc3-mm2 x86_64 box spontaneously rebooted.

    so from now on i guess i'll have to tag you as "does not want any
    advance testing and review help with his patches" person and will leave
    you alone.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-11-30 20:49    [W:0.031 / U:0.960 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site