Re: EV-64260-BP & GT64260 bi_recs

Mark A. Greer [off-list ref] wrote:

I see three options:

a) Do it the same was as we're going to do it in 2.5

[...]

b) Do a more advanced bi_rec scheme (like benh's proposal)

c) Do mininimum necessary in 2.4; do it "right" in 2.5

I vote for doing 'c' now and keeping it unchanged for 2.5, 2.6, 2.10, 3.0, and
the eternity.

Can we focus on this question so we can stop going in circles?  Besides if we
reach a concensus in a "few days" we can take MS' $50.  :)

Then we have to agree on how many days is a few. And remember, the count
started yesterday at 16:53 PST. Also you have to have not only a consensus, but
a working patch counter to mine, otherwise you have to push mine and I keep my
$50.

MS

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/