From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757778AbZEHPJ3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2009 11:09:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752570AbZEHPJT (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2009 11:09:19 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:44455 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751702AbZEHPJS (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2009 11:09:18 -0400 Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 17:08:41 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Roland McGrath Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Oleg Nesterov , Andrew Morton , jdike@addtoit.com, utrace-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/2] utrace/ptrace: simplify/cleanup ptrace attach Message-ID: <20090508150841.GB29974@elte.hu> References: <20090504193016.GA17076@redhat.com> <20090504194348.BC0EBFC32F@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090504163154.f3672a83.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090505230642.GA980@redhat.com> <20090506081225.GD8098@elte.hu> <20090506082300.GA16989@infradead.org> <20090506090512.GB24692@elte.hu> <20090506091115.GA24332@infradead.org> <20090506093740.GA7156@elte.hu> <20090507061343.9A986FC39E@magilla.sf.frob.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090507061343.9A986FC39E@magilla.sf.frob.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Roland McGrath wrote: > > It is far more efficient if Roland, Oleg (or you, if you are > > interested in this stuff - which you seem to be) did RFC patches and > > asked for maintainer acks, than to depend on maintainers to do it. > > This has been on offer since the first user_regset stuff went into > 2.6.25, and I think I reiterated that on linux-arch when > CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK went in. > > What it does require is some arch person to at least show interest > in seeing the patches, test-build them and/or point to usable > cross compiler setups, etc. It doesn't have to be arch > maintainers, but someone at all who uses the arch and is prepared > to build kernels for it. > > In the case of arm, the fine Fedora/ARM folks had already made it > easy enough for me to do two web searches and find the cross > compilers, qemu settings, and system images I could get going > lickety-split without even asking anyone for pointers. But as hch > noted, even doing 95% of the work myself up front (built and > tested!) hasn't yet helped get any feedback. > > For any arch where there is anyone out there but the crickets, > it's easy for me to help with the actual code. I just need a > little direction on arch build setups and maybe some specific arch > details questions, and a little feedback. But where the only > people you can find who've heard of an arch say, "We haven't > looked what's upstream since 2.6.22 or so," I don't want to waste > my time on untried patches that will just go stale without ever > being compiled. that's OK. If you went so far, if you were proactive and did due diligence, and nobody bothered, just push the changes into linux-next and there's no valid basis for future objections against those patches. Ingo