Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 10 Sep 2018 18:09:10 +0300
From:   Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@microsoft.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/tsc: Consolidate init code"
Message-ID: <20180910150910.GS5565@intel.com>
References: <20180910121925.27682-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1809101443290.1292@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <20180910140710.GR5565@intel.com>
 <20180910144720.GA28349@zn.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20180910144720.GA28349@zn.tnic>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 04:47:20PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 05:07:10PM +0300, Ville Syrj?l? wrote:
> > You're reading way too much into this. The revert is just a point to
> > start the conversion. I've found that it's the best way to get the
> > attention of the relevant developers. Other kind of regression
> > reports have an unfortunate habit of disappearing into /dev/null.
> 
> That's some strange "logic".
> 
> You're sending a patch which has "[PATCH]" in the subject but now you
> say it is not really a patch but only a way to get people's attention?!?

But it is a patch, and if it happens to get accepted as is so be
it. If not, it's a good place where to start the conversation on
how to fix the bug in another way.

You guys seem to have a notion that anything which says '[PATCH]'
is somehow final. In my book any patch is up for debate. Nothing
special about this one in that regard.

-- 
Ville Syrj?l?
Intel