Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:22:20 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] percpu for 2.6.31 |
| |
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Tejun Heo wrote: > > Please pull from percpu-for-linus git tree from: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/percpu.git for-linus
I'm very unhappy with this kind of crap.
Has it been tested AT ALL? Apparently not.
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c:98: error: multiple storage classes in declaration specifiers arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c:98: error: non-static declaration of ‘per_cpu__mces_seen’ follows static declaration arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c:98: note: previous declaration of ‘per_cpu__mces_seen’ was here .. and tons of other similar errors ..
and it was apparently done on purpose, for no good reason. The bug with static per-cpu variables is only for some broken architectures.
Even the _documentation_ uses "static DEFINE_PER_CPU(..)" for chissake!
To make matters worse, this whole series was clearly rebased (or applied from some other queue) just _minutes_ before sending it to me. No wonder it had zero testing:
- commit: Date: Thu Jun 18 16:22:05 2009 +0900 - email: Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:07:16 +0900
I'm not pulling it. Or rather, I pulled it, ended up doing other work, noticed the problems, and had to re-do my whole tree because I refuse to have sh*t like this in the kernel.
And I'm not going to pull trees that get rebased like this with basically no testing before sending it to me. There's a reason I don't like rebasing.
Linus -- 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/
| |