Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 7 Dec 2005 18:57:08 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch 00/21] hrtimer - High-resolution timer subsystem |
| |
* Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > (It's also interesting how you do that without giving me any > > > credit for it.) > > > > Sorry if it was previously your idea and if we didnt credit you for > > it. > > [...] > > > > > A bit later ktime_t looked pretty much like the 64bit part of my > > > ktimespec. > > > > and Thomas credited you for that point in his announcement: > > > > " Roman pointed out that the penalty for some architectures > > would be quite big when using the nsec_t (64bit) scalar time > > storage format. " > > "pointed out that the penalty" is a bit different from "provided the > basic idea of the ktime_t union and half the implementation"...
so ... did you change your position from accusing us of not giving you _any_ credit:
"It's also interesting how you do that without giving me any credit for it."
to accusing us of not giving you _enough_ credit? Did i get that right?
And ontop of that, you now want the credit for providing the basic idea for half of the ktimer/hrtimer implementation? Sorry that i did not find out in advance that you wanted _that_ ;-)
Ingo - 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/
| |