Re: [ck] Re: Swap prefetch merge plans

[Con Kolivas]

On Saturday 10 February 2007 00:13, jos poortvliet wrote:
> Nobody has said anything about costs, indeed. Now afaik, swap prefetch is
> designed to have no/as little as possible costs, so that makes sense. Does
> it have to have some bugs, which have to be adressed, before it can enter?
> I'm sure this can be arranged, right, Con?
>
> Sorry if I sound sarcastic. I'm no hacker myself, and sometimes these
> discussions don't make sense to me. A bit like the Staircase thingy ->
>
> "hi, I've got this piece of code which does the same as that piece, but
> better"
> "Why didn't you improve the old code?"
> "This is a better design -> half the code but doing a better job"
> "Well, it's not tested as much, so it won't go in. Go away!"
>
> There where those comments from Torvalds some time ago in an interview,
> about the kernel community becoming harder to get involved with. As an
> outsider, it sure seems so. I read frustrations everywhere. What about the
> kevent guy, his blog: http://tservice.net.ru/~s0mbre/blog
>
> I stumbled upon it when reading LWN. Seems pretty sad... I don't get the
> technical stuff, but the frustration almost blows up your monitor. Is there
> something fundamentally wrong with the kernel-hackers-culture, or are these
> incidents?

I greatly appreciate the support. Truly I do. 

But I do not like the direction this argument is going. Please let it go.

-- 
-ck
-
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/