Re: [RFC] Consolidate lots of hugepage code

From: William Lee Irwin III (wli_at_holomorphy.com)
Date: 11/07/04

  • Next message: Francois Romieu: "Re: ZyXEL GN650-T" 
    Date:	Sun, 7 Nov 2004 14:49:48 -0800
To: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>

    At some point in the past, I wrote:
    >> Until it's fixed. Until then I'm considering it a byproduct of that same
    >> development. And with your report, that makes it two architectures, not
    >> one.

    On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 08:22:12AM +1100, Anton Blanchard wrote:
    > We _arent_ seeing it on ppc64. Can we at least have a complete bug
    > report if we are to halt all hugetlb development? At the moment we dont
    > have much information to go on at all.

    Sorry, I don't get complete bugreports myself. If you care to try to
    actually fix something (it's doubtful you yourself are the culprit) I'm
    still trying to reproduce it myself with long-running database tests.
    It's reliably reproducible on the reporters' machines.

    The particular bug is only one piece of evidence. Just asking basic
    questions about what was done for architecture code reveals that
    all this "development" is not paying proper attention to architecture
    code. I merely insist that development toward the end of stabilization
    occur prior to that for large feature work.

    And frankly, I'm rather unimpressed with the gravity of the proposed
    featurework, particularly in comparison to the stability requirements
    of users on typical production systems.

    Nor am I impressed with the quality. The patch presentations have been
    messy, the audits (as mentioned above) incomplete, the benefits not
    clearly demonstrated, and the code itself not so pretty. Just
    respinning the patches so they're properly incremental and the code
    somewhat cleaner (e.g. some recent one nested tabs 5 deep or so)
    would already remedy a large number of the issues with the featurework.
    Once arranged that way the audits' incompleteness can be dealt with by
    those with the fortitude to thoroughly audit and/or prior architecture
    knowledge to correct the patches for arches they don't deal with properly.

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

  • Next message: Francois Romieu: "Re: ZyXEL GN650-T"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: how to tell 64 vs 32 bit architecture ?
      ... Or do you need something for the preprocessor? ... i was wondering what is the proper way to tell a 64 vs 32 bit ... architecture. ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • how to tell 64 vs 32 bit architecture ?
      ... i was wondering what is the proper way to tell a 64 vs 32 bit architecture. ... sure if this is generic enough (ie not gcc or FreeBSD specific), ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • Re: What means architecture?
      ... Piet Slaghekke wrote: ... > When downloading freebsd I am asked what architecture. ... Choose a proper subject when asking question. ...
      (freebsd-questions)