lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] percpu for 2.6.31


On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Please pull from percpu-for-linus git tree from:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/percpu.git for-linus

I'm very unhappy with this kind of crap.

Has it been tested AT ALL? Apparently not.

arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c:98: error: multiple storage classes in declaration specifiers
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c:98: error: non-static declaration of ‘per_cpu__mces_seen’ follows static declaration
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c:98: note: previous declaration of ‘per_cpu__mces_seen’ was here
.. and tons of other similar errors ..

and it was apparently done on purpose, for no good reason. The bug with
static per-cpu variables is only for some broken architectures.

Even the _documentation_ uses "static DEFINE_PER_CPU(..)" for chissake!

To make matters worse, this whole series was clearly rebased (or applied
from some other queue) just _minutes_ before sending it to me. No wonder
it had zero testing:

- commit:
Date: Thu Jun 18 16:22:05 2009 +0900
- email:
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:07:16 +0900

I'm not pulling it. Or rather, I pulled it, ended up doing other work,
noticed the problems, and had to re-do my whole tree because I refuse to
have sh*t like this in the kernel.

And I'm not going to pull trees that get rebased like this with basically
no testing before sending it to me. There's a reason I don't like
rebasing.

Linus
--
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: 2009-10-18 23:28    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site