From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763538AbXK3TqA (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:46:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753199AbXK3Tpw (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:45:52 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:48471 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751712AbXK3Tpv (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:45:51 -0500 Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 20:45:17 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Rusty Russell , Andi Kleen , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [patch 0/3] Per cpu relocation to ZERO and x86_32 percpu ops on x86_64 Message-ID: <20071130194517.GD9928@elte.hu> References: <20071130064305.459255715@sgi.com> <20071130112429.GA3605@elte.hu> <20071130112645.GA7565@elte.hu> <20071130180002.GB19571@elte.hu> <20071130183512.GA8985@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > if you treat testing and review efforts like that they might have to > > wait even longer :-( "My stuff is there somewhere amongst 1415 -mm > > patches. Thank you for your interest and buzz off already." > > Well I guess you have to get used to maintainership I think. F.e. the > s390 people tested this patchset without requiring a backport. > Typically arch maintainers test mm and do not force the patches back > into mainline. Huh?? This is getting absurd. Look at it from my perspective: i spent a few spare cycles on a Friday afternoon to check a few x86 relevant patches that looked interesting to me personally. At the moment they are still cooking in -mm and were not submitted to upstream merging yet - so i did not expect anything from them, but i wanted to help out because the patches looked good. This was not any "formal" x86 maintainance activity - your patches are still cooking. But i was thinking about maybe putting these patches into the x86 test grind to get them shaken out some more the random 1000 bootup tests a day that it does. When integrating your patches I found a bug and tentatively reported it to you, pointing out that it could easily be my merge fault. Basically i was offering you to let your patches cook in another kitchen as well. I never before had a negative response to that :-/ So i expected some "great that you are looking at this stuff, lemme help you sort it out, you missed these 2-3 patches in -mm" reaction (that's how i'd have reacted to you doing the same) instead i got these very surprising and fundamentlly hostile responses from you, an unfriendly "test -mm and dont pick out individual patches" suggestion and now this mail from you with this rather subtly formulated condescending tone: > Well I guess you have to get used to maintainership I think. [...] so i guess i'll leave it here for now with your percpu patches, i've got far better things to do on a Friday afternoon :-/ We'll deal with your stuff once it gets so far as upstream integration. > I am a bit surprised since Andi and I never had this issue. huh??? I am really wondering where this hostile attitude of yours comes from. Getting patches build and boot is something architecture maintainers do on a regular basis, it's a minimum requirement before getting something merged into an architecture. And btw., -rc3-mm2 seems to have grown a spontaneous reboot problem, that looks quite similar to what i saw: http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.24-rc3/2.6.24-rc3-mm2/announce.txt | - First bug report: after ten minutes happily compiling kernels my | 2.6.24-rc3-mm2 x86_64 box spontaneously rebooted. so from now on i guess i'll have to tag you as "does not want any advance testing and review help with his patches" person and will leave you alone. Ingo