Jaswinder, Let me transcribe what happened: * Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 18:08 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote: > > > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ > > > > > > - if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) { > > > > > > + if (!retval & (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) { > > > > > > /* > > > > > > * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it > > > > > > * to happen immediately, so let's make sure.... > > > > > > > > > > What is this ? [ Jaswinder misunderstands a patch and asks a rather stupid question in a demanding tone and does not go into any level of detail why he thinks the patch is wrong. Just a single look into the source code file in question would have shown him his mistake. ] > > > > > > > > You looking at the wrong place. [ Thomas, the genirq maintainer, points out Jaswinder's error calmly. ] > > > > > > > > > There is no retval: > > > > > > > > > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=blob;f=kernel/irq/manage.c;h=a3eb7baf1e46f2c735edb4cc44e0386cfbc4989e;hb=HEAD > > > > > > > > Care to read patches you want to comment on carefully _BEFORE_ you > > > > start yelling at people and sending useless copies of the wrong > > > > function around the world. > > > > > > > > The patch is perfectly fine and already applied. [ Thomas also asks Jaswinder to think things through before wasting other people's time. ] > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I know somehow you applied it. When you will merge this branch with > > > -tip/master then you will understand what I am saying. [ Jaswinder is being difficult: he writes that Thomas "somehow" applied the patch - ignoring the fact that Thomas is the maintainer of this code. Jaswinder is also suggesting in a condescending tone that Thomas does not understand the issue - while the code is perfectly fine and it is Jaswinder who is trivially wrong. Wasting more of Thomas's time. ] > > Jaswinder. I really start to get annoyed. > > [ Thomas, understandably, being into the 4th mail of a thread that should not have happened at all, is getting annoyed. ] > > That patch applies fine on master as well. [ Thomas points out another mistake in Jaswinder's argument. ] > > > Even function name is changed from: > > > > > > 713 int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler, > > > > > > 857 int request_threaded_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler, [ Jaswinder shows evidence of even more stupidity: he points out to Thomas that a function changed its name, forgetting two things: that 1) it is irrelevant and 2) Thomas did the rename in question. ] > > > > And why is this fcking relevant ? [ Thomas is really annoyed at Jaswinder writing wrong, irrelevant, time wasting mails without showing any sign of understanding the issues and without admitting fault. ] > > > > I am dead sure, you really need some good manners and need to > learn many things. [ Jaswinder, still not admitting his fault, compounds his mistakes by being even more condescending. ] Jaswinder, this is really not an acceptable pattern of behavior on lkml. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html