Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:53:57 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 06/20] early_res: seperate common memmap func from e820.c to fw_memmap.c | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> |
| |
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 22:54, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 21:57 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> > You use that arguemnt ONE MORE FUCKING TIME and you'll end up in my killfile >> > with a auto-NACK reply of anything that looks like a patch from you. >> >> Does this mean you disagree with that? (I think it's pretty factual, last i >> checked the usage stats of devel kernels was somewhere around 99.7%.) > > I disagree with that being a relevant argument in the technical > discussion on the relative merits of two implementations of a given > facility. I also disagree with your numbers, if you talk about > deployement, I would be very very surprised if ARM wasn't close to > on-par with x86.
FWIW, several years ago a MontaVista representative said there were more Linux units that did have their RT extensions than there were Linux units that did not have them...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
-- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
| |