Re: [GIT PULL] x86/atomic changes for v2.6.35

From: Stephen Rothwell
Date: Wed May 19 2010 - 10:36:58 EST


On Wed, 19 May 2010 07:24:00 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/19/2010 04:46 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > <boilerplate>
> > It's a pity this wasn't raised/resolved between its detection in linux-next and
> > before it entered mainline...
> > </boilerplate>
> As far as your boilerplate is concerned, I think Linus made it clear at
> the Kernel Summit that is it not the obligation of x86/ARM/PowerPC to
> slow down to not break the smaller architectures; it's the
> responsibility of those architecture maintainers to keep up. Sorry.

I don't think this reply has anything to do with the sentiments expressed
by Geert above. My interpretation of his comments is just that it is a
pity noone noticed the problem while it was only in linux-next and
reported it widely (like on linux-arch) so something could have been done
before it all Linus' tree. There was no suggestion of slowing the pace
of development.
Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature