On 09/25/2013 08:58 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Chen. > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 08:49:31AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote: >>> Can you please demonstrate such failure? You can tell kernel to >>> execute a given binary instead of init with "init=" param. >> >> OK, I will/should try, today (although I have to spend my additional >> time resource on it. :-( ). > > Please note that that's not necessarily "additional" resource that you > spend. It's more of something necessary to justify the changes you're > suggesting. It's true that not all bug fixes / improvements require > explicit demonstration but I'm not very convinced about your analysis > partly because I'm not too familiar with the code path but also > because the code has been stable with years and you seem pretty new to > the area. > >> Hmm... in fact, in my opinion, interface (especially content system >> call) need make itself consistency, although at present, it can not >> cause issue. > > Sure, it should be consistent but I'm not sure what you're perceiving > as inconsistent is actually inconsistent. Anyways, let's please have > something deomnstratable. We can think more about the interface > niggles afterwards. > > Thanks. >
OK, I see, the 'root cause' is: "you are not the related maintainer either", so it is really necessary for me to spend additional time resource on it :-(. But all together, thank you for spending your time resource on it, let us continue :-). Thanks. -- Chen Gang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
