On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:16:38 +0200, Andi Kleen said: (Note - I'm just a usually-confused crash test dummy here...)
> Well I spent a lot of time making the x86-64 timing code work > well on a variety of machines; working around a wide variety > of hardware and platform bugs. I obviously don't agree on your description > of its maintenance state. I'm seeing a bit of a disconnect here. If you spent all that time making it work, how come the guys who developed the patch are saying you didn't provide any feedback about the patchset? > > What contribution do we have from you instead? A week before the .23 > > I told him my objections privately earlier. Basically i would > like to see an actually debuggable step-by-step change, not a rip everything > out. Odd, I looked at the patchset fairly closely a number of times, as I was hand-retrofitting the -rc[1-4] versions onto -rc[1-4]-mm kernels, and it looked to *me* like it was a nice set of 20 or so step-by-step changes (bisectable and everything - I got to do that once trying to figure out which one I botched). Was there something in there that I missed?
pgpwwrNAbNuFm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
