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 -
| Ingo Molnar | Re: x86: 4kstacks default |
| Stephen Rothwell | Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-)) |
| Trent Piepho | [PATCH] [POWERPC] Improve (in|out)_beXX() asm code |
| Rafael J. Wysocki | [Bug #10919] [regression] display dimming is slow and laggy - Acer Travelmate 661lci |
git: | |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: iptables very slow after commit 784544739a25c30637397ace5489eeb6e15d7d49 |
| Andrew Morton | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
