From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: thread-index: AcQVpGnVyHPBPIpuQlyXdGaibCBPoQ== Envelope-to: paul@sumlocktest.fsnet.co.uk Delivery-date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 04:27:54 +0000 Message-ID: <019d01c415a4$69d5b6d0$d100000a@sbs2003.local> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft CDO for Exchange 2000 X-AuthUser: davidel@xmailserver.org Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:42:16 +0100 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message Importance: normal Priority: normal From: "Davide Libenzi" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.0 X-X-Sender: davide@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com To: Cc: "Linus Torvalds" , "Andrew Morton" , , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create In-Reply-To: <20040104015037.AE9A62C0AB@lists.samba.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Mar 2004 15:42:18.0390 (UTC) FILETIME=[6ACDAB60:01C415A4] On Sat, 3 Jan 2004, Rusty Russell wrote: > Still do. It's *simple*, and I refuse to be ashamed of that. > > My words were harsh, but I completely disagree with you. I believe > you are wrong. I would never have coded it the way you did. I read > your code and I still think you are wrong, and find your code both > bloated and ugly. Bloated ? This is the diffstat of my "ashamed" patch over your bits :-) include/linux/init_task.h | 3 + include/linux/sched.h | 8 ++++ kernel/kthread.c | 78 ++++++++++++++++------------------------------ 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) > Now, on something we do agree: I dislike the global structure myself. > By all means try changing the code to use a pipe between child and > parent for the initfn result. But I've told you that I will not > submit any solution which adds to a generic structure for a specific > problem. > > I'm very, very sorry this has gotten a little heated: I generally > enjoy our discussions. But I don't think I should have to say "no" > four times. It's ok Rusty, I enjoy the discussion in any case :-) Since I told you in a private email that I was convinced myself about adding stuff inside the struct, you could have avoided the "ashamed" thing. But it's fine, a little bit of sarcasm is the salt of life. - Davide