Re: Event logging vs enhancing printk

John Alvord
2002-04-09T18:18:03Z

On Tue, 09 Apr 2002 07:42:32 -0700, "Martin J. Bligh"
<Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com> wrote:

>> As I understand, Linus accepts new features only if they are improving
>> kernel in some vital area significantly (for example, Ingo's new
>> scheduler).
>
>I think that's more true of 2.4 than 2.5, but a change should indeed
>make some improvement to be accepted. What seems to be more vital
>is that the cost:benefit ratio is advantageous ... much of the
>discussions that Larry and I were having were oriented to keeping
>the cost very low indeed ... if you didn't turn on event logging,
>the cost would be pretty much 0 (just those macro unwraps).
>
What I have observed is that Linus tends to accept some major changes
that have achieved a certain consensus. ReiserFS is a good example. It
was in wide use and was being shipped by SUSE... not universal but
there was significant usage. Other good ideas with no significant
usage languish unless it is something interesting to Linus himself.

john