Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix page table size

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andi Kleen
Date: Thursday, February 7, 2008 - 10:28 am

On Thursday 07 February 2008 12:54:42 Ingo Molnar wrote:

I see yes. The original was ok I think, but it must have been a typo when
I switched the boolean to a enum on Thomas request and for some
reason the new breakage didn't show up on my testing.

I wonder why you didn't keep the enum even though Thomas
insisted on it. Since you removed it again the safest would have been
to just keep it correct as it originally was. And it was rather pointless
to force me to do changes when you then afterwards half way rewrite the code 
anyways. To be honest that habit makes it rather unpleasant to submit
patch to you recently. At least you could have indicated that in advance
and safe everybody trouble.

-Andi
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] x86_64: fix page table size, Yinghai Lu, (Wed Feb 6, 9:22 pm)
[PATCH] x86_64: clean up find_e820_area, Yinghai Lu, (Wed Feb 6, 9:23 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix page table size, Andi Kleen, (Thu Feb 7, 12:23 am)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix page table size, Ingo Molnar, (Thu Feb 7, 1:09 am)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: clean up find_e820_area, Ingo Molnar, (Thu Feb 7, 1:12 am)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix page table size, Yinghai Lu, (Thu Feb 7, 1:36 am)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix page table size, Ingo Molnar, (Thu Feb 7, 1:49 am)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix page table size, Ingo Molnar, (Thu Feb 7, 4:54 am)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix page table size, Andi Kleen, (Thu Feb 7, 10:28 am)