From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] preempt: Debug for possible missed preemption checks
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 20:08:22 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140118200822.5d41ffce@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140119115253.d6974d9c188c6d9e88d04b80@canb.auug.org.au>
On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 11:52:53 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Given that the merge window will probably open today or tomorrow, I would
> prefer any new code not intended for 3.14 not be added to linux-next
> until after v3.14-rc1 to avoid unneeded conflicts. If, however, Andrew
> thinks it is still worth the (maybe minimal) pain, then fine.
I'm not sure this is even intended for 3.15 either ;-)
I'm fine with waiting, to keep from adding any extra pain just before a
merge window. I guess the question is, is it OK to keep it in
linux-next for 3.15 even though it may not even go into 3.15? Depends
on how useful it proves to be. Perhaps it may require staying in
linux-next till 3.16.
Perhaps in order to keep merge windows from being an issue, I can add it
at each -rc1, and remove it at -rc6, if it didn't catch any bugs. But as
soon as it does catch a bug, we can say it's worth going into mainline.
Does that sound fine with you?
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-19 1:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-17 4:57 [RFC][PATCH] preempt: Debug for possible missed preemption checks Steven Rostedt
2014-01-17 5:12 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-17 9:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-18 23:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-01-19 0:52 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-19 1:08 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2014-01-21 23:50 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-22 19:47 ` Paul Gortmaker
2014-01-22 20:09 ` Steven Rostedt
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=20140118200822.5d41ffce@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=williams@redhat.com \
/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