Re: [patch 00/21] hrtimer - High-resolution timer subsystem

[Ingo Molnar]

* Roman Zippel <zippel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > > (It's also interesting how you do that without giving me any 
> > >  credit for it.)
> >
> > Sorry if it was previously your idea and if we didnt credit you for 
> > it.
> > [...]
> >
> > > A bit later ktime_t looked pretty much like the 64bit part of my 
> > > ktimespec.
> > 
> > and Thomas credited you for that point in his announcement:
> > 
> >  " Roman pointed out that the penalty for some architectures
> >    would be quite big when using the nsec_t (64bit) scalar time
> >    storage format. "
> 
> "pointed out that the penalty" is a bit different from "provided the 
> basic idea of the ktime_t union and half the implementation"...

so ... did you change your position from accusing us of not giving you 
_any_ credit:

   "It's also interesting how you do that without giving me
    any credit for it."

to accusing us of not giving you _enough_ credit? Did i get that right?

And ontop of that, you now want the credit for providing the basic idea 
for half of the ktimer/hrtimer implementation? Sorry that i did not find 
out in advance that you wanted _that_ ;-)

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/