Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 15:56:19 -0500 From: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> To: Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org> Cc: current <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: VDSO on amd64 Message-ID: <CAPyFy2CYtGt2WPCGVx8riPnxsHB7=DK6gYb2H4dMYVYWrf3F=Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <YZ8gWxjM3IIazqCw@home.opsec.eu> References: <YZ72kgvfGR5D%2Bzs2@kib.kiev.ua> <YZ8gWxjM3IIazqCw@home.opsec.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 at 00:36, Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Eleven years ago Giuseppe Cocomazzi posted this: > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2010-April/031553.html > > vdso and shared page patch I see the patch generated a couple of responses on the list when it was posted, including a plan to follow up with a detailed review that appears not to have happened. It's unfortunate, and as a project we definitely have an issue that not all contributions are addressed in a timely manner. One of the goals of the Git working group, and Warner's newer development practices working group, is to make it easier to handle contributions. Of course contributions can be overlooked regardless of whether they're patches on a mailing list, attached to a Bugzilla PR, opened as a Phabricator review, or as a GitHub or Gitlab pull or merge request. There isn't a technical solution that will fully address this, but we can reduce friction as much as possible.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPyFy2CYtGt2WPCGVx8riPnxsHB7=DK6gYb2H4dMYVYWrf3F=Q>