> I guess that patch does indeed address both correctness and performance
> aspects, but I wasn't sure attempting to pull those apart was a safer
> option, given that at least in its current form it has seen testing in
> mainline ...

Reasonable enough indeed.

> I'd certainly be happy to try out a more stripped down patch; could you be
> more specific about exactly which parts you want me to omit?

The "We can perform the transformation if" thing, but in the end I agree that 
it's probably better to backport the unmodified changes.  Thanks.

-- 
Eric Botcazou

Reply via email to