On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:No, I'll take the damn patch, but quite frankly, I think your arguments suck. I've told you so before, and asked for numbers, and all you do is handwave. And this is like the *third*time*, and you don't even seem to admit that you're handwaving. So let's do it, but dammit: - make sure there aren't any invalid statements like this in the final commit message. - if somebody shows that you were wrong, and points to a real load, please never *ever* make excuses for this again, ok? Is that a deal? I hope we'll never need to hear about this again, but I really object to the way you've tried to "sell" this thing, by basically starting out dishonest about what the problem was, and even now I've yet to see a *single* performance number even though I've asked for them (except for the problem case, which was introduced by *you*) Linus -
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] Stop pmac_zilog from abusing 8250's device numbers. |
| Andrew Morton | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 010/196] Chinese: add translation of Codingstyle |
| Jan Engelhardt | intel iommu (Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| David Miller | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Felix von Leitner | socket api problem: can't bind an ipv6 socket to ::ffff:0.0.0.0 |
git: | |
