Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Overview of concurrency managed workqueue | From | Daniel Walker <> | Date | Wed, 16 Jun 2010 13:40:12 -0700 |
| |
On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 22:24 +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: > On 06/16/2010 10:19 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > >> I don't have any problem with that. I would be almost happy to get > >> your NACK. > > > > Oh yeah? why is that? > > Because the discussion isn't leading anywhere and I've already thrown > almost everything I can think of, so if I haven't convinced you yet > there's very low probability that I'll be able to do with further > discussion. So, I duly collected your Nacked-by: on the reason that > cmwq doesn't allow setting priorities from userland. > > Thanks and have a good night.
Ok, and please don't try to summarize why there is a NAK'ed-by, if people want to know they can contact me directly or read this thread.
Daniel
| |