From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtprelay0080.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.80]:46736 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751227AbbDMWDu (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Apr 2015 18:03:50 -0400 Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 18:03:47 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use -mcount-record for dynamic ftrace Message-ID: <20150413180347.6bfc0d5c@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20150413215508.GW15335@tassilo.jf.intel.com> References: <1428886467-4969-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <20150413153212.131fabc1@gandalf.local.home> <20150413215508.GW15335@tassilo.jf.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andi Kleen Cc: Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, mmarek@suse.cz On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 14:55:08 -0700 Andi Kleen wrote: > > Interesting. But I can't accept this until I can test it. I don't have > > AFAIK that's a unique policy. I don't think any other maintainer operates > this way. Um, really? Other maintainers don't test patches that they maintain? This isn't like hardware that I don't have. This could certainly affect people if it breaks, and I will be responsible to fix it. I'm not going to do that until I have a setup where I can test things that break. > > > I wonder who's responsible for > > https://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/bin/x86_64/ > > > > If they can add a i386/x86_64 build for gcc5 I'll be happy to download > > it and test this patch. > > That doesn't make any sense. > What, adding gcc5 to the crosstools suite? Why not? -- Steve