Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932453AbZFLEIN (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:08:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751310AbZFLEH7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:07:59 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:32922 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751242AbZFLEH7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:07:59 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:07:51 -0400 From: Kyle McMartin To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Peter Zijlstra , Al Viro , Ingo Molnar , "David S. Miller" , Stephane Eranian , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Performance Counters for Linux Message-ID: <20090612040751.GA20922@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <20090611160329.GA3366@elte.hu> <20090611161714.GA5008@infradead.org> <20090611165226.GV8633@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <1244739378.6691.540.camel@laptop> <20090611170015.GA3651@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1741 Lines: 42 [With my Fedora on.] On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:06:55AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > So what point is there in keeping it in-tree except making life hell for > > packagers? > > Give it up. Packagers can trivially generate their own sub-packages. They > do it all the time. They already do it for the user-mode header files, > extracted from the kernel - something you've worked on yourself. > > So your point is clearly bogus, and dishonest. > > You haven't actually looked the real problem in the eye, and acknowledged > the disaster that is oprofile. Let's give a _new_ approach a chance, and > see if we can avoid the mistakes of yesteryear this time. > This is actually somewhat complicated for (at least, I can only speak from experience for...) Fedora and Debian/Ubuntu. Having this in-kernel means any bugfixes needed for the 'perf' tool, require patching the kernel source, which will result in a whole new kernel rpm being built. So in order to update their 'perf' tool, users will get a new kernel, debuginfo, etc., with it. So either we need to split it out into its own source tarball, or ship the kernel source again in a seperate source package. I know which I'm going to tend to favour... Obviously, I understand the reasons for doing this, but I don't really see it as a sensible long term option for a mature tool. But, whatever, it's not my call. We'll just work around whatever happens. regards, Kyle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/