Re: Final kprobes rollup patches

[Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>]

Hi Ingo,

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>>> cool! Please Cc: lkml and Harvey as well so that there's less 
>>> overlap in unification work - Harvey spent quite some time unifying 
>>> and cleaning up the kprobes code during the past week.
>> Should I rewrite it based on current git tree?
>> My patch includes 3 part of patches.
>> - 2 Bugfix patches (which is not merged yet.)
>> - 2 booster patches (ditto)
>> - 2 unification patches (most of this patches are already done by Harvey's patch)
> 
> would it be easier/more robust to first did the unification patches and 
> then get the bugfixes and new features in? That would give us your 
> bugfixes and new features on both 32-bit and 64-bit at the same time.

As far as I can see, my patches have less #ifdefs than Harvey's.
However, that patch's granularity may be not so good currently.

> feel free to do whichever approach you prefer - but it would be nice to 
> preserve the unification and cleanup work done by Harvey.

OK, rewriting will take a while, so I sent a series of patches which I have just now.

> btw., is any of your bugfixes 2.6.24 material?

Yes, I'd like to fix first two bugs in 2.6.24.

Thank you very much,

> 
> 	Ingo

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu

Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
Software Solutions Division

e-mail: mhiramat@redhat.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com