On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 16:35 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > I think you know what your talking about, and I respect your opinion.. I > think you have some points, that I will follow up on. However most of > what your saying comes off to me like, "Reverse _all_ your changes!" , > "Makes this patch set go away for 2 months", and I don't understand > where that is coming from. I did nowhere say, that you should revert _ALL_ your changes ! If you need 2 month to fixup the issues I pointed at , I can't help it. 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/
- 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]>
- 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
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] libata: skip reset on bus not a device
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] [kernel/ subdirectory] constifications
- Previous by thread: Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree
- Next by thread: [PATCH] um: setup irq regs in do_IRQ
- Index(es):