From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261472AbVFEPVv (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Jun 2005 11:21:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261543AbVFEPVv (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Jun 2005 11:21:51 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:37115 "EHLO godzilla.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261472AbVFEPVt (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Jun 2005 11:21:49 -0400 Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2005 08:21:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Daniel Walker To: Thomas Gleixner cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Inaky Perez-Gonzalez , Oleg Nesterov , Esben Nielsen Subject: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, plist fixes In-Reply-To: <1117984662.20785.295.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 5 Jun 2005, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 07:51 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > __plist_del was a good fix. I attached a patch on "Plist cleanup on RT" to > > lkml with what was acceptable to me. A good 60% of Thomas's changes are > > unacceptable to me. > > Would you be so kind to explain that a bit ? Your patch contains _all_ > my proposed changes except the additional plist_first_entry macro and > the comment cleanup. > > So what are the 60% which are unacceptable. Comments ? I'm amused. Whatever was missing was unacceptable. Daniel