Re: [stable] aim7 scalability issue on 4 socket machine

[Greg KH]

On Sun, Dec 06, 2009 at 10:11:05PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sun 2009-12-06 21:11:36, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >  - It must be obviously correct and tested.
> > >  - It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.
> > >  - It must fix only one thing.
> > >  - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
> > >    problem..." type thing).
> > 
> > A significant slow down in a common situation is a "significant
> > bug that bothers people"
> 
> Well, IIRC it was benchmark that was slowed down, on huge system, so
> it was exactly "this could be a problem".
> 
> Anyway, I don't care about -stable series too much (and sorry for
> replying to such an old mail), but perhaps the docs should be updated?
> 
> Examples cited there are such as "data corruption" or "oops", which is
> clearly different ballpark then "slowdown".

Why does it really matter if the intent is the thing that matters here.

Deal with specifics on a case-by-case basis, and if you don't really
care about this, then why dig up a many-month old thread?

strange,

greg k-h
--
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/