|| ||Andrew Morton <akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org> |
|| ||james_p_freyensee-AT-linux.intel.com |
|| ||Re: [PATCH 1/4] export kernel call get_task_comm(). |
|| ||Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:46:21 -0700|
|| ||Greg KH <gregkh-AT-suse.de>, David Rientjes <rientjes-AT-google.com>,
|| ||Article, Thread
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:16:08 -0700
J Freyensee <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 16:11 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:14:21 -0700
> > Greg KH <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > > But as David pointed out, if there is work other than mine coming that
> > > > has already been proposed, wouldn't it be good to get this patch in
> > > > place now to start the encouragement of future eyes to just call this
> > > > function than re-invent the wheel?
> > >
> > > No, then those projects submit the patch to export this, if they happen
> > > to get to mainline before this one does.
> > >
> > > Again, don't export something unless you are using it at the time, no
> > > "this is to be used hopefully by something in the future" type stuff
> > > please. Who knows if those future plans ever pan out.
> > Well there's an easy solution here. Send the patch to export
> > get_task_comm(), then send along some patches which fix
> > z:/usr/src/linux-2.6.39-rc4> grep -r 'current->comm' drivers | wc -l
> > 89
> Andrew, so does this mean you want me to send this patch to export
> get_task_comm() to you then?
That works. But Greg might see us doing it, so some additional
mergeable patches which *need* that export will keep him happy.
(iow, you're being extorted into doing some kernel cleanup work)
to post comments)