In message <20030224171657.GA96095@compsoc.man.ac.uk> you write:
> So you'll add code in case somebody might want it, but you refuse to fix
> regressions wrt the old code because it's a "corner case" (as if corner
> cases isn't exactly what makes things complicated) ? How odd :)
You still complaining about not stashing the full path name of the
module somewhere in the kernel?
That would be because that was a HACK, and it's my job to say "no",
even when that means we're not "feature complete" by someone's
definition.
You seem to have taken the politeness of my previous response as an
indication of uncertainty. I am sorry if I gave that impression,
allow me to translate it into Torvaldsian:
Your patch added a specific "profile_module_loaded()" call
which did nothing but call a notifier. Just call a damn
notifier directly, which is more obvious, more flexible, less
code and more expandable, and doesn't give you a black star
for being stupid.
Or, in Viroese, "Vetoed".
Hope that helps 8)
Rusty.
-- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 28 2003 - 22:00:24 EST