From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752424Ab1LSKvZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Dec 2011 05:51:25 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:40941 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751691Ab1LSKvV (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Dec 2011 05:51:21 -0500 Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:49:15 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Greg KH Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Mathieu Desnoyers , devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] sched: export task_prio to GPL modules Message-ID: <20111219104915.GA19861@elte.hu> References: <1322775683-8741-1-git-send-email-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <1322775683-8741-10-git-send-email-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <1322776568.4699.52.camel@twins> <20111201221404.GC3365@kroah.com> <1322780830.4699.62.camel@twins> <20111201231751.GA4961@kroah.com> <20111205141749.GC28866@elte.hu> <20111206214446.GD1247@kroah.com> <20111208052354.GC9485@elte.hu> <20111208232709.GA19820@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111208232709.GA19820@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.3.1 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 06:23:54AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > Distros have new CPU schedulers and are still dragging the 4g > > > split around? A whole new networking stack would be > > > interesting, and if self-contained, possible :) > > > > The point being, there's legitimate reasons to refuse crap to an > > area that *people care about* in a constructive manner. > > > > There's no rejection of LTTNG in the "hey, go away, you are > > doing it wrong" fashion - we are not holding a monopoly on how > > instrumentation is supposed to be done and we've been wrong > > before. > > > > There's a highly constructive, open attitude towards LTTNG and > > has been for years: > > > > " Mathieu, please split it up and integrate/unify it with the > > existing instrumentation features of Linux - and if it > > replaces existing stuff because an LTTNG component is > > superior then so be it. " > > Ok, that's fair enough. > > Mathieu, will you please work on this? Or is there some > reason you don't feel this is possible? Mathieu, any update on this? I don't want the LTTNG goodies to drop on the floor - we just have to integrate them properly. If you 100% disagree with how specific things are done upstream right now then don't hold back: just replace existing mechanisms - that gives a starting point to discuss what the best way is forward. > > drivers/staging/ is a tool that i support in many (in fact most) > > cases - but i don't support it if it does harm. > > > > I'm supposed to say 'no' to extra complexity more often, and > > this is definitely one of those cases: > > > > Nacked-by: Ingo Molnar > > > > Also obviously NAK to the scheduler symbol export - that alone > > should tell you that it's not just a "driver" - it deeply hooks > > into the core kernel... > > > > Please respect the NAK. > > Will do, I'll go delete it from the staging-next tree now. Thanks Greg! Ingo