Hi Ingo, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes:[...] I find it sad that this goes in now. I wrote a clean version of reserve_bootmem() [1] and it was rejected with arguments that I did not understand [2] and that were not further explained even though I asked for it [3]. http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/16/76 http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/16/234 http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/16/250 Your comment was rather unfair, because it gave the impression you did not read the thread before replying. And you did not react to other explicit questions from me. If you find my patches to be crap, say so and please explain WHY so I have a chance to improve. Please, reconsider the bootmem patches; bootmem code looks really bad at the moment. Hannes --
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
| Vladislav Bolkhovitin | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Andrew Morton | -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
| Can E. Acar | Re: Wasting our Freedom |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| PJ Waskiewicz | [ANNOUNCE] ixgbe: Data Center Bridging (DCB) support for ixgbe |
