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

* Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> 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:

http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.24-rc3/2.6.24-rc3-mm2/announce.txt

| - 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.

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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-11-30 20:49    [W:0.099 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site