From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753895AbXDDSmu (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2007 14:42:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753893AbXDDSmt (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2007 14:42:49 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:51892 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750714AbXDDSmr (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2007 14:42:47 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 11:41:32 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Ingo Molnar , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , ego@in.ibm.com, paulmck@us.ibm.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vatsa@in.ibm.com, Oleg Nesterov , dipankar@in.ibm.com, dino@in.ibm.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com, Roland McGrath Subject: Re: utrace merge Message-Id: <20070404114132.4d563267.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070404103624.GA509@infradead.org> References: <20070402053457.GA9076@in.ibm.com> <20070402061612.GA7072@elte.hu> <20070403120104.GB29308@in.ibm.com> <200704032134.29720.rjw@sisk.pl> <20070403132427.88308b59.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070404100644.GC19120@elte.hu> <20070404103624.GA509@infradead.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 11:36:24 +0100 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 12:06:44PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > urgh, I screwed up, sorry. > > > > > > utrace-prep-2 reverts a bit of the underlying tree so that the utrace > > > patches (which are against mainline) don't throw a tremendous reject > > > which has to be fixed each time I pull Roland's tree. I'm supposed to > > > reapply that change after the utrace patches but forgot. > > > > btw., how about pushing utrace to v2.6.22, is anything big holding that > > up? (other than Roland's modesty, which we should gently but firmly > > ignore in this case =B-) > > a) lots of architecture support > b) lots of overengineered and obsfucated code > c) missing public information > > I've also not gotten any feedback to my ages old review and the issues > don't seem to be addressed either. > And rmk had showstopper problems with ARM support which I never saw resolved.