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

Greg KH
2011-12-08T23:28:59Z

On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 06:23:54AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> 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?

> 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 <mingo@elte.hu>
>
> 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.

greg k-h