Re: [RFC patch 0/5] genirq: add infrastructure for threaded interrupt handlers

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Thu, 2 Oct 2008, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 18:28 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > Why are you bringing up real time in this thread?? The thread has
> > > > absolutely nothing to do with real time. This thread is about a better
> > > > way to handle interrupt handlers.
> > > 
> > > I'm concerned about the connection between the two, which is what I'm
> > > commenting on.
> > 
> > Well, please take that up separately. Do you see these patches going
> > into the -rt tree?  No, they are going in mainline. We will deal with
> > them for -rt when the time comes.
> 
> It's an RFC after all, it's not going into anything at this point..

Because you are deciding what's going into mainline, right ?

> > You are bringing up concerns about mainline changes with something that
> > is maintained outside the mainline tree.  Changes to mainline have never
> > been influenced by changes maintained outside of mainline.
> 
> Again it's an RFC .. It's not going into mainline.. 

You made such a statement vs. hrtimers some time ago. 

> > Yes Daniel, I know. But this is not a conversation. This is a email thread
> > that is talking about changes to mainline. The mainline kernel developers
> > really don't care about any issues that these changes will do to the
> > real time project. The real time project is a niche, and is currently
> > outside the mainline tree. Hence, lets stop bothering mainline 
> > developers with our issues.
> 
> Your speaking for a lot of developers.. It's an RFC, it's coming from
> real time developers, it's real time connected, and this is the real
> time development list ..

This RFC patch is from a mainline developer/ maintainer who happens to
be a real time developer as well.

Welcome to my real time incoherent nonsense filter

	tglx