Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270908AbUJVJhu (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:37:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270934AbUJVJfi (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:35:38 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:51619 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270932AbUJVJbg (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:31:36 -0400 Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:31:03 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Bill Huey Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Rui Nuno Capela , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Lee Revell , mark_h_johnson@raytheon.com, "K.R. Foley" , Adam Heath , Florian Schmidt , Michal Schmidt , Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano Subject: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-rc4-mm1-U8 Message-ID: <20041022093103.GQ1820@suse.de> References: <20041021202422.GA24555@nietzsche.lynx.com> <20041021203350.GK32465@suse.de> <20041021203821.GA24628@nietzsche.lynx.com> <20041022061901.GM32465@suse.de> <20041022085007.GA24444@nietzsche.lynx.com> <20041022085928.GK1820@suse.de> <20041022090637.GA24523@nietzsche.lynx.com> <20041022090938.GB24523@nietzsche.lynx.com> <20041022092058.GO1820@suse.de> <20041022092404.GA24605@nietzsche.lynx.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041022092404.GA24605@nietzsche.lynx.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1524 Lines: 35 On Fri, Oct 22 2004, Bill Huey wrote: > On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 11:20:59AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > I've been as clear as I know how on the matter of semaphore use in > > Linux. I've made no comments at all on improving your deadlock > > detection scheme. > > True, but "...deadlock detection breaks" is a negative comment about > the deadlock detector without a positive suggestion to change it, is > it not ? if so, then suggest a change to be made and it'll get > implementated somehow. It's a statement about the deadlock detection which is true, it's not a negative comment. A negative comment would be something ala "the deadlock detection code is crap". Note, to avoid further confusion in this thread: I have not read the deadlock detection code, nor do I intend to. The sentence is only an example of what a negative comment would look like, in no way does it reflect my view of the deadlock detection code. End disclaimer. As I said, I have no personal motivation to work on the deadlock detection. My interest in the thread pertained only to code in the kernel and its use of semaphores - something that we already cleared up many mails ago. So, please, lets just end it here. This branch of the thread has already dragged on for way too long. -- Jens Axboe - 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/