From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1758965AbYCUSpj@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1758965AbYCUSpj (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:45:39 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753357AbYCUSpb
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:45:31 -0400
Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:33164 "EHLO
	one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752563AbYCUSpa (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:45:30 -0400
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:48:19 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, andreas.herrmann3@amd.com,
       mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [5/7] Readd rdmsrl_safe II
Message-ID: <20080321184819.GN2346@one.firstfloor.org>
References: <20080312353.598285931@firstfloor.org> <20080312025331.B113B1B41D1@basil.firstfloor.org> <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803211756000.3781@apollo.tec.linutronix.de> <20080321171636.GE2346@one.firstfloor.org> <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803211857030.3781@apollo.tec.linutronix.de> <20080321180612.GK2346@one.firstfloor.org> <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803211909501.3781@apollo.tec.linutronix.de> <20080321184656.GM2346@one.firstfloor.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20080321184656.GM2346@one.firstfloor.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 07:46:56PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Never mind I retract the clean up patch. While doing the actual
> reordering is not that difficult I would need to retest and I don't
> have time for that now. And since reordering tends to requiring
> typing in everything again and I make occasional typos (and I added
> bugs in the past during such reordering exercises) the retesting
> would be needed. But for that clean up it is probably not worth it.
> After all it just makes the code a little nicer, but doesn't fix
> or improve anything. 
> 
> Please still consider the other patches in the serioes.

Oops that ended up in the wrong thread sorry. The comment
was regarding the early exception recursion -> iteration change,
not for rdmsrl_safe (which is not a clean up)

-Andi