On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 18:06, Russell King wrote: > On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 06:01:08PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: > > On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 17:58, Russell King wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 04:13:10PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: > > > > Noone's ignoring you. > > > > > > > > What we need to do is ensure that dynamic ticks is working properly > > > > on x86 and worth including before anything else. If and when we > > > > confirm this it makes sense only then to try and merge code from the > > > > other 2 architectures to as much common code as possible as no doubt > > > > we'll be modifying other architectures we're less familiar with. At > > > > that stage we will definitely want to tread even more cautiously at > > > > that stage. > > > > > > dyntick has all the hallmarks of ending up another mess just like the > > > "generic" (hahaha) irq stuff in kernel/irq - it's being developed in > > > precisely the same way - by ignore non-x86 stuff. > > > > > > I can well see that someone will say "ok, this is ready, merge it" > > > at which point we then end up with multiple differing userspace > > > methods of controlling it depending on the architecture, but > > > multiple differing kernel interfaces as well. > > > > > > Indeed, you seem to be at the point where you'd like akpm to merge > > > it. That sets alarm bells ringing if you haven't considered these > > > issues. > > > > > > I want to avoid that. Just because a couple of people say "we'll > > > deal with that later" it's no guarantee that it _will_ happen. I > > > want to ensure that ARM doesn't get fscked over again like it did > > > with the generic IRQ crap. > > > > Ok I'll make it clearer. We don't merge x86 dynticks to mainline till all > > are consolidated in -mm. > > Does this mean you're seriously going to rewrite bits of it after > you've spent what seems like months sorting out all the problems > currently being found? > > Excuse me for being stupid, but I somehow don't see that happening. > Those months would be effectively wasted effort, both on the side > of the people working on the patches and those testing them.
I've personally been on this code for 3 separate days in total and have no deadline or requirement for this to go in ever so I should stop speaking on behalf of the others. Cheers, Con - 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/