From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: Next patches for the 2.6.25 queue
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:32:02 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071213133202.11374f54.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071213144642.GA7800@Krystal>
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:46:42 -0500
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I would like to post my next patches in a way that would make it as
> easy for you and the community to review them. Currently, the patches
> that have really settled down are :
>
> * For 2.6.25
>
> - Text Edit Lock
> - Looks-good-to Ingo Molnar.
> - Immediate Values
> - Redux version, asked by Rusty
>
> * For 2.6.25 ?
>
> Another patchset that is technically ok (however Rusty dislikes the
> complexity inherent to the algorithms required to be reentrant wrt NMI
> and MCE, although it's been reviewed by the community for months). I
> have also replyed to Ingo's concerns about effeciency of my approach
> compared to dtrace by providing numbers, but he has not replyed yet.
> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg238317.html
>
> - Markers use Immediate Values
>
> * Maybe for 2.6.26 ...
>
> Once we have this, and the instrumentation (submitted as RFC in the past
> weeks), in the kernel, the only architecture dependent element that will
> be left is the LTTng timestamping code.
>
> And then, from that point, the following patchset is mostly
> self-contained and stops modifying code all over the kernel tree. It
> is the LTTng tracer.
>
> Trying to improve my approach : I guess that submitting at most 15
> patches at a time (each 1-2 days), against the -mmotm tree, would be the
> way to do it ?
>
Just for some context, I have...
- 1,400-odd open bugzilla reports
- 719 emails saved away in my emailed-bug-reports folder, all of which
need to be gone through, asking originators to retest and
re-report-if-unfixed.
- A big ugly email titled "2.6.24-rc5-git1: Reported regressions from
2.6.23" in my inbox.
All of which makes it a bit inappropriate to be thinking about
intrusive-looking new features.
Ho hum. Just send me the whole lot against rc5-mm1 and I'll stick it in
there and we'll see what breaks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-13 21:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-13 14:46 Next patches for the 2.6.25 queue Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-12-13 15:49 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-14 16:43 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-12-15 22:14 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-13 21:32 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2007-12-13 22:18 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071213133202.11374f54.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox