Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree

On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 15:13 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 23:38 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I don't see that behaviour on my machines and nobody complains about
> > that. I don't care about stale comments. Point me to a bug report
> > instead of your perception of what's optimal and not.
> 
> Let both do this. Lets discuss empirical behavior. Otherwise we aren't
> making any progress. 

Go, grep the LKML archives and let those who had problems test your
modifications. Come back when they confirm that it does not change
anything.

You want to change behaviour of the current code, so it's your job to
verify that it does not break anything.

I have been there and done that with the ARM interrupt code
http://www.linutronix.de/index.php?page=testing

I know what I'm talking about.

	tglx


-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Funky "Blue screen" issue while rebooting from X with 2.6.18-git21
• Next by Date: Re: 2.4.x: i386/x86_64 bitops clobberings
• Previous by thread: Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
• Next by thread: Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]