One might be inclined to go back and review all commits by the person who chose to commit this sledgehammer solution.
Also the patch that was committed (which was the third version) was reviewed by two other developers and acked by two more. That will add about 1700 more commits to your endeavor.
Nobody said the committer was not intelligent nor prolific. What was implicitly brought into question was the judgement of the person.
"But all the people who reviewed and accepte the commit!..." Sometimes reviewers don't pay full attention (because they are busy). Or sometimes they don't feel confident to challenge someone. Or they may be inexperienced.
Second, do you have any idea if the issue being solved here and what a less clumsy fix would look like. Nobody is denying that it's clumsy, which is why it is being reverted, but have you evaluated the alternatives or even bothered to look up mailing list discussions before making your conclusions about it?