Re: [PATCH 3/3] utrace-based ftrace "process" engine, v2
[Posted March 25, 2009 by jake]
| From: |
| Linus Torvalds <torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org> |
| To: |
| "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche-AT-redhat.com> |
| Subject: |
| Re: [PATCH 3/3] utrace-based ftrace "process" engine, v2 |
| Date: |
| Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:02:59 -0700 (PDT) |
| Message-ID: |
| <alpine.LFD.2.00.0903211501060.3030@localhost.localdomain> |
| Cc: |
| Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra-AT-chello.nl>, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt-AT-goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx-AT-linutronix.de>, utrace-devel-AT-redhat.com |
| Archive‑link: | |
Article |
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>
> > If testing utrace against its main application requires installation
> > of a complete enterprise distro from a distro [...]
>
> This has *never* been a requirement.
You guys are getting off a tangent.
Let's go back to the post that started this all.
> The thing is, utrace crashes in Fedora have dominated kerneloops.org
> for many months, so i'm not sure what to make of the idea of posting
> a 4000+ lines of core kernel code patchset on the last day of the
> development cycle, a posting that has carefully avoided the Cc:-ing
> of affected maintainers ;-)
.. and dammit, I agree 100%. If utrace really shows up in _any_ way on
kerneloops.org, then I think THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION in this thread is moot.
I'm not going to take known-bad crap. It's that simple. Don't bother
posting it, don't bother discussing it, don't bother making excuses for
it.
Linus
