lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] SCHED_EDF scheduling class
On 09/23/2009 06:08 PM, Daniel Walker wrote:
>
>> Not true, you want to address the major issues first. What's the point
>> of fixing whitespace if the whole approach is rejected? if it has to
>> undergo a rewrite? (not an opinion on EDF btw, just as an example)
>>
> I'm not sure why your fixated on whitespace , but thinking about it more
> I don't think it matters .. If you fix whitespace or major issues first,
> it doesn't matter .. All the issues have to eventually get fixed .. Not
> to mentioned that LKML is not something you could remotely control in
> that way.
>

A technical issue is that if you rewrite the code the whitespace fix
becomes irrelevant. But more important is that it's a distraction when
people are thinking about requirements and design.

>>> In this case the author is not totally aware of how to submit this
>>> code.. I don't think it's at all inappropriate to comment on that. His
>>> next submission will likely be much cleaner and nicer. It may even speed
>>> up the inclusion process since he'll be more easily able to submit the
>>> code (with practice and comments from us).
>>>
>>>
>> Give people some credit.
>>
> What do you mean?
>
>

If he's able to write a scheduling class, he'll pick up the coding style
when it becomes relevant.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-23 17:15    [W:2.019 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site