Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.5.59_lost-tick_A0

From: john stultz (johnstul@us.ibm.com)
Date: Fri Jan 24 2003 - 18:06:21 EST

Next message: Matti Aarnio: "Re: debate on 700 threads vs asynchronous code"
Previous message: Stephen Hemminger: "Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.5.59_lost-tick_A0"
In reply to: Stephen Hemminger: "Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.5.59_lost-tick_A0"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 15:13, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> Minor nit: detect_lost_tick could be static and inline.

Good point, I'll fix that before my next release.

Thanks for the feedback!
-john

-
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: Matti Aarnio: "Re: debate on 700 threads vs asynchronous code"
Previous message: Stephen Hemminger: "Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.5.59_lost-tick_A0"
In reply to: Stephen Hemminger: "Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.5.59_lost-tick_A0"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 31 2003 - 22:00:13 EST