Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757791AbZDNQ4P (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:56:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753872AbZDNQz4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:55:56 -0400 Received: from smtp.ultrahosting.com ([74.213.174.254]:53633 "EHLO smtp.ultrahosting.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752423AbZDNQzz (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:55:55 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:48:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@qirst.com To: Ingo Molnar cc: Linus Torvalds , Tejun Heo , Martin Schwidefsky , rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, Paul Mundt , rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, starvik@axis.com, ralf@linux-mips.org, davem@davemloft.net, cooloney@kernel.org, kyle@mcmartin.ca, matthew@wil.cx, grundler@parisc-linux.org, takata@linux-m32r.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, rth@twiddle.net, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, Nick Piggin , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH UPDATED] percpu: use dynamic percpu allocator as the default percpu allocator In-Reply-To: <20090414140416.GE27163@elte.hu> Message-ID: References: <20090401154913.GA31435@elte.hu> <20090401190113.GA734@elte.hu> <20090401223241.GA28168@elte.hu> <20090402034223.GA25791@elte.hu> <20090408162651.GA14449@elte.hu> <20090414140416.GE27163@elte.hu> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1187 Lines: 34 On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > The thing is, i spent well in excess of an hour analyzing your > patch, counting cachelines, looking at effects and interactions, > thinking about the various implications. I came up with a good deal > of factoids, a handful of suggestions and a few summary paragraphs: > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123862536011780&w=2 Good work. > A proper reply to that work would be one of several responses: > ... > > 3) agree with the factoids and disagree with my opinion. Yep I thought that what I did... > Furthermore, you also tried to 'win' this argument by increasing the > volume of shouting, by injecting unprovoked insults and by using a > patronizing and irritated tone. Win an argument? I want to restore the function of __read_mostly to what it was intended. It seems that you wanted instead to tag labels on all sorts of variables in the kernel that show their usage pattern. -- 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/