Ingo, On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:33 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > In any case, until that happens and until there's agreement with >> > the x86 maintainers (there's none at the moment) the perfmon3 tree >> > (or at least its x86 bits) needs to be removed from linux-next. I >> > already see a number of problems with the patchset that we'll have >> > to work out via an iterative review process. >> >> That process has been happening except it seems that the x86 >> maintainers haven't bothered to participate. [...] > > uhm, that's plain not true. There are three x86 maintainers and we > take pride in replying to all x86 patch submission within a day > typically, so i reject your suggestion. > > We know and knew about the existence of the perfmon patches, but they > were always in the vague RFC category and never directly submitted or > Cc:-ed to us. > As Stephen pointed out, the full patchset was posted on LKML in October I never saw any comments from you or any other x86 maintainers. I always assumed you were ALL on LKML anyway. The perfmon patchset has been posted on LKML numerous times. I have listened to all comments and made tons of changes both internally and to the syscall APIs. I would not call this patchset a 'vague RFC'. > The authors of those patches never even bothered to Cc: the x86 arch > maintainers, and never asked for those patches to be Ack-ed, accepted > or reviewed. If that is not so, please show me the lkml link that > contradicts my claim. > You were cc'ed but apparently there is a problem with the script I am using to post this patchset as it seems it was sent only to LKML and the cc-list got dropped. > > All i'm asking for is to not use linux-next as a backdoor to get > _unreviewed_ and _clearly bad_ patches behind the back of architecture > maintainers who specifically asked to be involved. > I would appreciate if you could explain and point me to the x86 code which you think is bad. I am always happy to take constructive comments to improve the code. I have reposted the full patchset yesterday on LKML but unfortunately my script dropped the cc-list. I will repost today making sure x86@xxxxxxxxxx is cc'ed. I am sorry about that, it never was intentional. I will be waiting for your feedback on the x86 code. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
