Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:57:21 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "Tim J. Robbins" <tjr@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: RE: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_trap.c Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0301311251330.45015-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20030131151727.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 31-Jan-2003 Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, John Baldwin wrote: > > > >> > >> On 31-Jan-2003 Julian Elischer wrote: > >> > > >> > do you know of any other problems? > >> > >> thread_statclock() has a similar problem as others have noticed: > > > > what others? > > > > why doesn't anyone tell ME these things? > > is there some discussion going on in a places I don't see? like IRC? > > ----- > revision 1.77 > date: 2003/01/26 11:41:34; author: davidxu; state: Exp; lines: +646 -513 > Move UPCALL related data structure out of kse, introduce a new > data structure called kse_upcall to manage UPCALL. All KSE binding > and loaning code are gone. > ... > > Reviewed by: julian > ----- > > Read that last line. What does that mean to you? To me it means > that you have looked at the actual diff and approved it. You didn't > see any bugs in it, etc. Now, either you didn't look very hard, or > that last line is a lie. Either way, I want this commit backed out > until such time as it has a 'Reviewed by' line that means something. > It's not enough to just keep fixing the bugs that others find when > they crop up. Saying that you reviewed something means that you > should be taking responsibility to test things out and really look > at them before they are committed. John I'm not saying that the patch shouldn't have been tested more, and in fact my name shouldn't have been there really because I didn't say "go ahead and commit" I said "my machine is running, it's looking good so far, who will be responsible for the commit"? This was not as clear as I hoped and David took it (English is not his first language) to be "go ahead and commit". Having had teh commit however and it seems t be working now, I don;t think it shouldbe backed out at this stage.. the KSE part of thepatch is solid and has been thoutoughly tested.. teh statclock part (maybe it shoudl have been 2 different commits) was obviously not tested at all, and I'll nail David on that when he gets back. It is however water under the bridge at this stage so let's get on with life. What I want to know is where did you hear other people pointing out that "thread_statclock() has a similar problem"? I seem to only be seeing a part of the discussion here.. people keep refering to error reports by people that I have not seen. > > -- > > John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ > "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0301311251330.45015-100000>