From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752681AbaIHEvA (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2014 00:51:00 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.220.47]:65448 "EHLO mail-pa0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751430AbaIHEu7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2014 00:50:59 -0400 Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 13:50:54 +0900 From: Tejun Heo To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Li Zefan , cgroups@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] cgroup fixes for v3.17-rc4 Message-ID: <20140908045054.GA8526@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <20140908012025.GF5061@mtj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Linus. On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 08:17:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > In other words, I'll happily pull this, but your excuses for it are > wrong-headed. There is no "crazyness justifies this". That's crap. But > the argument of "nobody does this, so let's fix it before anybody > _starts_ doing it" is perfectly valid - with the deep and implicit > understanding that if it turns out somebody *does* do it, the change > gets reverted asap. Yeap, that's the intention which I failed to articulate. It's highly unlikely to be in use currently and would already be noticeably breaking things. Given that it's justified to try to ban '\n' usage and see whether anybody reports regression from that. Will describe similar situations more accruately from now on. Thanks. -- tejun From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] cgroup fixes for v3.17-rc4 Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 13:50:54 +0900 Message-ID: <20140908045054.GA8526@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <20140908012025.GF5061@mtj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=VBCdTFlWXP2osE4oZvXfszA12hRQvsw+nr3dcrowrwk=; b=K2b+kEfio9/8iYlU6vgnnhPhvjj74UHUTnj5ROlZ5rCIvNZmtAknEX1VeFS6PjRxLe 5PC9+44R0kpk1vux6/Gaw5WQtK+FJAEGq7rKirwaC9X3FYZUslur92IehEJn6fasE17s ZYihQEUPvDEPeHG1stwSkE6tgpEnQz9ZRhJOK80O5QkB0eP+YFLIlcX40c8kPPL2VeFL 7/yqR8hdEw4aD5u6bxbPtOd77tp3OQFD3BzclEPQsEkVrRGAsOgPwu3NNtFB69DcID7j qvPrg4o+TOBi/ZwRMClSkeg/RcM6oRmhsncjMiDF0lf0FsBf7oZD3jIMAe5JimoIvTR2 1V0g== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Li Zefan , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Hello, Linus. On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 08:17:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > In other words, I'll happily pull this, but your excuses for it are > wrong-headed. There is no "crazyness justifies this". That's crap. But > the argument of "nobody does this, so let's fix it before anybody > _starts_ doing it" is perfectly valid - with the deep and implicit > understanding that if it turns out somebody *does* do it, the change > gets reverted asap. Yeap, that's the intention which I failed to articulate. It's highly unlikely to be in use currently and would already be noticeably breaking things. Given that it's justified to try to ban '\n' usage and see whether anybody reports regression from that. Will describe similar situations more accruately from now on. Thanks. -- tejun