Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 01 Oct 2014 10:00:18 +0100 | From | Bryan O'Donoghue <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: Quark: Add legacy_cache_size and TLB comments |
| |
On 01/10/14 09:57, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: >> On 01/10/14 01:11, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> On the substance. >> I'm certainly not trying to antagonise you here - I assumed you were >> *suggesting* to apply those comments directly ? >> Which is why I updated the sent patches with your comments - since they >> seemed more descriptive anyway - and sent back to the list. > > That part is fine. What really annoyed me is the patch: > > Subject: [PATCH] x86: Call identify_cpu() unconditionally once remove other > callsites > > which is a complete fail in all aspects. You should be able to figure > that out yourself easily: > > Read the reviews of "[PATCH 1/3] x86: Bugfix bit-rot in the calling of > legacy_cache_size" again carefully. Then look at your patch, the > subject line and the changelog. It should be pretty obvious.
OK - I'll read again.
Thanks for the reviews
| |