Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 27 Apr 2008 14:13:57 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING |
| |
* David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: "Dave Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com> > Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 19:16:31 +1000 > > > just because something lands in the core kernel tree doesn't mean it > > is actually perfect, far from it.. > > This is entirely missing the point. > > We get patches reviewed before they hit the tree, not afterwards. > > Ingo is making that impossible.
hrmpf. David, i can only repeat that what you say is plain out false. The CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING patch was posted to lkml originally, about two months ago:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/3/3/122
then it was re-posted at the time of the pull request as well:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/911104?page=last
and i just posted a (trivial) RFC patch to lkml today that would turn it into a generic feature:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/27/47
so i'm not sure what this big fuss is about ...
Moving this (now apparently hotly desired!) feature from arch/x86/Kconfig to init/Kconfig is no big deal and lets continue with more important issues. No puppies got hurt, really :)
You can use the patch i posted or you've got my conceptual Acked-by for touching arch/x86/Kconfig or can do it without asking - i dont mind -, it's an obviously correct change that i not only wanted all along but also implemented that way originally (twice!), until stupid lkml objections forced it into arch/x86 as i went the path of least resistance.
Yes, in hindsight, i should have stood up for that change and should have made a stink about it on linux-arch but there's just so many flamewars that fit into a day ;-)
Ingo
| |