On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 18:57 -0500, Karim Yaghmour wrote: > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > If we add another hardwired implementation then we do not have said > > benefits. > > Please stop handwaving. Folks like Andrew, Christoph, Zwane, Roman, > and others actually made specific requests for changes in the code. > What makes you think you're so special that you think you are > entitled to stay on the side and handwave about concepts.
So the points you added to your todo list which were brought up by me are worthless ? I'm not handwaving. I started this RFC to move the discussion into a general discussion about instrumentation. A couple of people are seriosly interested to do this. If you are not interested then ignore the thread, but you're way not in a position to tell me to shut up. You turned this thread into your LTT prayer wheel. Roman pointed out your unwillingness to create a common framework before. But I have to disagree with him in one point. It's not amazing, it's annoying. > If there is a limitation with the code, please present actual > snippets that need to be changed and suggest alternatives. That's > what everyone else does on this list. I pointed you to actually broken code and you accused me of throwing mud. > Save the bandwidth Please remove me from cc, it's a good start to save bandwidth. > and start cleaning. Yes, I did already start cleaning cat ../broken-out/ltt* | patch -p1 -R tglx - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/