Re: Low Latency Patch

[Alexander Viro]

On Sat, 1 Jul 2000, Robert Dinse wrote:

>      If it were my code, and there were an obvious way to achieve the
> functionality and meet those objectives, I would do so. 
> 
>      It's not my code but I think the functionality Mingo created is
> worthwhile.  I don't have the knowledge of the kernel internals, the time, a
> machine I can boot 200 times a day and do kernel profiling on, etc, to develope
> code with equivalent functionality that is "prettier", "neat", and
> "maintainable".

So why on the Earth do you presume that you can speak for Ingo? You admit
that
	a) you don't understand his patch
	b) you don't understand the kernel internals
	c) you don't understand the problems with the patch (hardly
surprising, considering (b))
	d) you have no time/desire to change (a)--(c)
... and apparently you don't give a damn for author's opinion:

"*I* was unhappy with the structure of that patch to begin with. The patch
is ugly and unacceptable (read: a kludge) for inclusion into the 
mainstream kernel, period."

And all that - with references to vox populi, joint letters and getting
that -><- close to preaching about the needs of oppressed masses. Pardon
me while I barf - it brings back oh-so-lovely memories of my dear
motherland circa early '80s. Sheesh...