Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: Quark: Add legacy_cache_size and TLB comments

2014-10-01 Thread Bryan O'Donoghue
On 01/10/14 09:57, Thomas Gleixner wrote: On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: On 01/10/14 01:11, Thomas Gleixner wrote: On the substance. I'm certainly not trying to antagonise you here - I assumed you were *suggesting* to apply those comments directly ? Which is why I updated the sent p

Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: Quark: Add legacy_cache_size and TLB comments

2014-10-01 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: > On 01/10/14 01:11, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On the substance. > I'm certainly not trying to antagonise you here - I assumed you were > *suggesting* to apply those comments directly ? > Which is why I updated the sent patches with your comments - since t

Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: Quark: Add legacy_cache_size and TLB comments

2014-09-30 Thread Bryan O'Donoghue
On 01/10/14 01:11, Thomas Gleixner wrote: Bryan, On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: what are you trying to achieve by sending out patches faster than anyone can review? Thomas. That's not the intention at all. Doing this has an obvious outcome: 1) The patches you whip up 10 se

Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: Quark: Add legacy_cache_size and TLB comments

2014-09-30 Thread Thomas Gleixner
Bryan, On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: what are you trying to achieve by sending out patches faster than anyone can review? Doing this has an obvious outcome: 1) The patches you whip up 10 seconds after the review hits your inbox are likely not to be well thought out. Neither