Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935674Ab1ETL4f (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2011 07:56:35 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:36246 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935641Ab1ETL4d (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2011 07:56:33 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 13:56:14 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Huang Ying Cc: Len Brown , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andi Kleen , "Luck, Tony" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , Andi Kleen , "Wu, Fengguang" , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Peter Zijlstra , Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] HWPoison: add memory_failure_queue() Message-ID: <20110520115614.GH14745@elte.hu> References: <1305619719-7480-1-git-send-email-ying.huang@intel.com> <1305619719-7480-6-git-send-email-ying.huang@intel.com> <20110517084622.GE22093@elte.hu> <4DD23750.3030606@intel.com> <20110517092620.GI22093@elte.hu> <4DD31C78.6000209@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4DD31C78.6000209@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.3.1 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1097 Lines: 27 * Huang Ying wrote: > > So why are we not working towards integrating this into our event > > reporting/handling framework, as i suggested it from day one on when you > > started posting these patches? > > The memory_failure_queue() introduced in this patch is general, that is, it > can be used not only by ACPI/APEI, but also any other hardware error > handlers, including your event reporting/handling framework. Well, the bit you are steadfastly ignoring is what i have made clear well before you started adding these facilities: THEY ALREADY EXISTS to a large degree :-) So you were and are duplicating code instead of using and extending existing event processing facilities. It does not matter one little bit that the code you added is partly 'generic', it's still overlapping and duplicated. Thanks, 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/