Re: linux-next: add utrace tree
From: Frederic Weisbecker
Date: Wed Jan 20 2010 - 05:43:39 EST
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.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/