From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 15:11:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 01 of 11] mmu-notifier-core In-Reply-To: <20080507215840.GB8276@duo.random> Message-ID: References: <20080507130528.adfd154c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080507215840.GB8276@duo.random> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Andrew Morton , clameter@sgi.com, steiner@sgi.com, holt@sgi.com, npiggin@suse.de, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, kanojsarcar@yahoo.com, rdreier@cisco.com, swise@opengridcomputing.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, avi@qumranet.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, general@lists.openfabrics.org, hugh@veritas.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, aliguori@us.ibm.com, chrisw@redhat.com, marcelo@kvack.org, dada1@cosmosbay.com, paulmck@us.ibm.com List-ID: On Wed, 7 May 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > As far as I can tell, authorship has been destroyed by at least two of the > > patches (ie Christoph seems to be the author, but Andrea seems to have > > dropped that fact). > > I can't follow this, please be more specific. The patches were sent to lkml without *any* indication that you weren't actually the author. So if Andrew had merged them, they would have been merged as yours. > > That "locking" code is also too ugly to live, at least without some > > serious arguments for why it has to be done that way. Sorting the locks? > > In a vmalloc'ed area? And calling this something innocuous like > > "mm_lock()"? Hell no. > > That's only invoked in mmu_notifier_register, mm_lock is explicitly > documented as heavyweight function. Is that an excuse for UTTER AND TOTAL CRAP? Linus -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org