From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932215AbXFEUvJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 16:51:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1763043AbXFEUu4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 16:50:56 -0400 Received: from www.osadl.org ([213.239.205.134]:37215 "EHLO mail.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758706AbXFEUu4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 16:50:56 -0400 Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] ufd v1 - unsequential O(1) fdmap core From: Thomas Gleixner To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Eric Dumazet , Davide Libenzi , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linus Torvalds , Ulrich Drepper In-Reply-To: <20070605203720.GA5519@elte.hu> References: <20070603230859.5000424d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070604080537.GA22898@elte.hu> <20070604080941.GA23537@elte.hu> <20070604013449.ea3acca8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070604122857.1399e3fc.dada1@cosmosbay.com> <20070604152540.985c186a.dada1@cosmosbay.com> <20070604141235.GA24352@elte.hu> <20070604162721.500211c9.dada1@cosmosbay.com> <20070605203720.GA5519@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 22:50:54 +0200 Message-Id: <1181076654.4404.161.camel@chaos> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 (2.10.1-4.fc7) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 22:37 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > For example, the recent futex.c changes you did in commit 34f01cc1 > > > are, and unfortunately there's no better word i can find: plain > > > disgusting. You apparently have plopped the 'fshared' code into the > > > existing logic via conditionals and have blown up the complexity of > > > the functions for no good reason - instead of neatly separating them > > > out. You have added _33_ (thirty-three!) new 'if' branches to > > > futex.c! The feature you introduced is nice and useful, but for > > > heaven's sake please work on cleanliness of your code some more and > > > undo that colossal damage ... preferably before working on other > > > areas of the kernel. > > > > This code took the normal path for inclusion and discussion. If you > > find it so horrible, you should complained before. Fact is that you > > Acked it :) > > yes, of course, i still think it's a good and nice patch, all things > considered =B-) > > > If you wanted to make a joke, I find it quite misplaced. > > no, i just wanted to make a demonstration that one can be pretty nasty > in on-lkml replies while being technically correct :-) I think you went > a bit overboard in your replies to Davide. Lets move this back into > constructive channels, ok? :) I'm digging into the pending futex bugs anyway. I'm doing some cleanups along the way to make the code look more like it used to look before :) tglx