Re: [RFC/Requirements/Design] h/w error reporting

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 02:00:45PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 19:41 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > We'll need to embark on this incremental path instead of a rewrite-the-world thing. 
> > As a maintainer my task is to say 'no' to rewrite-the-world approaches - and we can 
> > and will do better here.
> 
> Thus you are saying that we stick to the status quo, and also ignore the
> fact that perf was a rewrite-the-world from ftrace to begin with.


Perhaps you and Mathieu can summarize your requirements here and then explain
why extending the current ABI wouldn't work. It's quite normal that people
try to find a solution fully backward compatible in the first place. If
it's not possible, fine, but then justify it.

--
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/