On Fri, 25 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
> Michel raised his concern after that point, so no matter what it was > already in a tree I'd pushed out to public so the only answer when he > raised his concern was to revert or fix it. Just to be fair to Michel (and prevent any unnecessary "fights" on the list, for which I am sure people have had enough by now), the concern in question that triggered revision of the API was raised in time, but I oversaw it in the pile of other comments I was also trying to address. I am neither the first nor the last guy to inadvertently drop a review comment due to limited "bandwidth", so this should not be made into a big deal. Especially, when no damage was done (except for a few extra E-mails and a little extra work). Dave did the follow-up patch to satisfy Michel (thanks!) and I have already submitted the user space stuff that matches it, so hopefully we are all aligned now. thanks, Ilija
