Re: [PATCH x86] [12/16] Optimize lock prefix switching to run less frequently
- From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 16:04:57 +0100
On Friday 04 January 2008 16:02:37 Pekka Enberg wrote:
Hi Andi,
On Jan 4, 2008 4:39 PM, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> wrote:
The kernel process request that _all_ contributors run their patches
through checkpath.pl and fix the problems.
That's new. When and by whom was that rule been introduced? And with what
rationale?
Not be new to anyone trying to sneak a patch past Andrew for the past
few months...
I got several in and I don't remember anybody complaining about this
before Ingo/Thomas.
-Andi
--
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/
- References:
- [PATCH x86] [0/16] Various i386/x86-64 changes
- From: Andi Kleen
- Re: [PATCH x86] [12/16] Optimize lock prefix switching to run less frequently
- From: Andi Kleen
- Re: [PATCH x86] [12/16] Optimize lock prefix switching to run less frequently
- From: Pekka Enberg
- [PATCH x86] [0/16] Various i386/x86-64 changes
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH x86] [5/16] Replace hard coded reservations in x86-64 early boot code with dynamic table II
- Next by Date: Asus P1-AH2 won't suspend (regression)
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH x86] [12/16] Optimize lock prefix switching to run less frequently
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH x86] [12/16] Optimize lock prefix switching to run less frequently
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
