From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755976AbZFCGY6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2009 02:24:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753271AbZFCGYr (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2009 02:24:47 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:55506 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753254AbZFCGYq (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2009 02:24:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 08:24:45 +0200 From: Nick Piggin To: Andi Kleen Cc: Wu Fengguang , "hugh@veritas.com" , "riel@redhat.com" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "chris.mason@oracle.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] [13/16] HWPOISON: The high level memory error handler in the VM v3 Message-ID: <20090603062445.GA27563@wotan.suse.de> References: <20090528082616.GG6920@wotan.suse.de> <20090528095934.GA10678@localhost> <20090528122357.GM6920@wotan.suse.de> <20090528135428.GB16528@localhost> <20090601115046.GE5018@wotan.suse.de> <20090601183225.GS1065@one.firstfloor.org> <20090602120042.GB1392@wotan.suse.de> <20090602124757.GG1065@one.firstfloor.org> <20090602150952.GB17448@wotan.suse.de> <20090602171915.GS1065@one.firstfloor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090602171915.GS1065@one.firstfloor.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 07:19:15PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 05:09:52PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:47:57PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:00:42PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > > [snip: reusing truncate.c code] > > > > > > With all that writing you could have just done it. It's really > > > > > > I would have done it if it made sense to me, but so far it hasn't. > > > > > > The problem with your suggestion is that you do the big picture, > > > but seem to skip over a lot of details. But details matter. > > > > BTW. just to answer this point. The reason maybe for this > > is because the default response to my concerns seems to > > have been "you're wrong". Not "i don't understand, can you > > detail", and not "i don't agree because ...". > > Sorry, I didn't want to imply you're wrong. I apologize if > it came over this way. I understand you understand this code > very well. I realize the one above came out > a bit flamey, but it wasn't really intended like this. Ah it's OK :) Actually that was too far, most of the time actually you gave constructive responses. Just one or two sticking points but probably I was getting carried away as well. Nothing personal of course! > I'll take a look at your suggestion this evening and see > how it comes out. Cool. > > Anyway don't worry. I get that a lot. I do really want to > > help get this merged. > > I wanted to thank you for your great reviewing work, even if I didn't > agree with everything :) But I think the disagreement were quite > small and only relatively unimportant things. Yes, I see nothing fundamentally wrong with the design... Thanks, Nick