Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752891Ab0ATKne (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 05:43:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752681Ab0ATKnc (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 05:43:32 -0500 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.157]:40084 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752723Ab0ATKna (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 05:43:30 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=ehBUBgOqBeh98k0AZnuHnofw5ql2CLmnPT2/l6XtgWbrrq0pkuEaQW5zYb4X87KRMu cBwWb3jP+XCOE0omCOTUl/wntpKr9M1rmzQYCkvpOcqazgqVx7bfk9VTtWiJyf81S9UL DUI9rieWtngSI3PGfR6xhItbqe1rPbTfcdSeY= Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:43:24 +0100 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli Cc: Ingo Molnar , Stephen Rothwell , Peter Zijlstra , Peter Zijlstra , LKML , Steven Rostedt , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , "Frank Ch. Eigler" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , utrace-devel@redhat.com, Thomas Gleixner , Linus Subject: Re: linux-next: add utrace tree Message-ID: <20100120104322.GA5149@nowhere> References: <20100119211646.GF16096@redhat.com> <20100120111220.e7fb4e2c.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20100120054950.GB27108@elte.hu> <20100120061551.GB6588@in.ibm.com> <20100120062834.GB12165@elte.hu> <20100120064026.GC6588@in.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100120064026.GC6588@in.ibm.com> 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: 1564 Lines: 36 On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 12:10:26PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote: > > It will cause conflicts with various other trees and increases the overhead > > all around. It also causes us to trust linux-next bugreports less - as it's > > not the 'next Linux' anymore. Also, there's virtually no high-level technical > > review done in linux-next: the trees are implicitly trusted (because they are > > pushed by maintainers), bugs and conflicts are reported but otherwise it's a > > neutral tree that includes pretty much any commit indiscriminately. > > > > If you need review and testing there's a number of trees you can get inclusion > > into. > > So would -tip be one of them? If so could you pull the utrace-ptrace > branch in? > > Or did you intend some other tree (random-tracing)? (Though I think a > ptrace reimplementation isn't 'random'-tracing :-)) Heh. No this is a tree I use for, well, random tracing patches indeed, which has extended to random tracing/perf/* patches by the time. I sometimes relay other's patches to Ingo toward this tree but this is usually about small volumes and for small term storage: patches that have been reviewed/acked already. utrace/uprobe is about high volume and longer time debate/review/maintainance and I won't have the time to carry this. > Ananth -- 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/