* Roman Zippel <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > (It's also interesting how you do that without giving me any
> > > credit for it.)
> >
> > Sorry if it was previously your idea and if we didnt credit you for
> > it.
> > [...]
> >
> > > A bit later ktime_t looked pretty much like the 64bit part of my
> > > ktimespec.
> >
> > and Thomas credited you for that point in his announcement:
> >
> > " Roman pointed out that the penalty for some architectures
> > would be quite big when using the nsec_t (64bit) scalar time
> > storage format. "
>
> "pointed out that the penalty" is a bit different from "provided the
> basic idea of the ktime_t union and half the implementation"...
so ... did you change your position from accusing us of not giving you
_any_ credit:
"It's also interesting how you do that without giving me
any credit for it."
to accusing us of not giving you _enough_ credit? Did i get that right?
And ontop of that, you now want the credit for providing the basic idea
for half of the ktimer/hrtimer implementation? Sorry that i did not find
out in advance that you wanted _that_ ;-)
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
