From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265113AbUADEX4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:23:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265117AbUADEX4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:23:56 -0500 Received: from x35.xmailserver.org ([69.30.125.51]:12672 "EHLO x35.xmailserver.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265113AbUADEXz (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:23:55 -0500 X-AuthUser: davidel@xmailserver.org Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 20:23:54 -0800 (PST) From: Davide Libenzi X-X-Sender: davide@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com To: Rusty Russell cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create In-Reply-To: <20040104015037.AE9A62C0AB@lists.samba.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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