Re: [PATCH 09/11] sched: export task_prio to GPL modules

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:07:10AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 14:14 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > greg k-h
> > 
> > Greg, why are you merging this crap anyway? Aren't there enough tracer
> > thingies around already?
> 
> I don't know, is there?
> 
> There's some reason the distros, and users, still use lttng, 
> so I'm guessing that it fits the needs of quite a few people.

Same goes for a whole lot of other crap that distros are 
carrying. Would we want to merge a different CPU scheduler or 
the 4g:4g patch or a completely new networking stack into 
drivers/staging/? I don't think so.

I.e. putting LTTNG into drivers/staging/ will not really solve 
anything - and in may in fact delay any sane technical 
resolution:

There's a difference between a driver that has to go into 
drivers/staging/ because nobody cares enough [and the driver 
isnt high quality enough yet], and a core kernel feature that we 
DO care about and which HAS BEEN REJECTED IN ITS FORM.

> That's why I'm merging it, if that the in-kernel stuff 
> obsoletes lttng, great, let me, and the distros know.

I'm NAK-ing the LTTNG driver really, as it's a workaround for a 
core kernel NAK.

Mathieu, please work with the tracing folks who DO care about 
this stuff. It's not like there's a lack of interest in this 
area, nor is there a lack of willingness to take patches. What 
there is a lack of is your willingness to actually work on 
getting something unified, integrated to users...

LTTNG has been going on for how many years? I havent seen many 
steps towards actually *merging* its functionality - you insist 
on doing your own random thing, which is different in random 
ways. Yes, some of those random ways may in fact be better than 
what we have upstream - would you be interested in filtering 
those out and pushing them upstream? I certainly would like to 
see that happen.

We want to pick the best features, and throw away current 
upstream code in favor of superior out of tree code - this 
concept of letting crap sit alongside each other when people do 
care i cannot agree with.

Thanks,

	Ingo