On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 12:31:48PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote: > On 6/5/21 1:43 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Andres, > > > > On Thu, Jun 03 2021 at 12:03, Andres Freund wrote: > >> On 2021-06-01 23:53:00 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >>> You surely made your point that this is well thought out. > >> > >> Really impressed with your effort to generously interpret the first > >> version of a proof of concept patch that explicitly was aimed at getting > >> feedback on the basic design and the different use cases. > > > > feedback on what? > > > > There is absolutely no description of design and obviously there is no > > use case either. So what do you expect me to be generous about? > > That's a complete fallacy, the very RFC is about clarifying a > use case that I was hinted about, not mentioning those I described > you in a reply. Obviously Then consider this: Nacked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> for anything touching futex.c, until such time that you can provide a coherent description of what and why you're doing things.
