[PATCH] MAINTAINERS: kgdb: Replace Jason with Daniel

[PATCH] MAINTAINERS: kgdb: Replace Jason with Daniel

[Daniel Thompson]

... with many, many thanks for Jason for all his hard work.

Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
---

Notes:
    Over the years Jason has become increasingly hard to get hold off
    and I think he must now be regarded as inactive.
    
    Patches in kgdb-next (mine as it happens) have been there for over a
    year without a corresponding pull request and a couple of architecture
    specific kgdb fixes have ended up missing a release cycle (or two) as
    the architecture maintainer waits for an Acked-by from Jason.
    
    In the past I've had to rely on Andrew M. to land my own changes to
    kgdb and in the v4.14 cycle you'll find my Acked-by on b8347c219649
    ("x86/debug: Handle warnings before the notifier chain, to fix KGDB
    crash"). That I was sharing surrogate acks convinced me we need a
    change here and I've offered Jason help via private e-mail without
    reply.
    
    So, I really would prefer it it if this patch listed me as a
    co-maintainer or, failing that, as least had Jason's blessing... but
    it doesn't. I certainly suggest this patch takes a long time in
    review, and if it doesn't attract Jason's attention then I can only
    reiterate what is says in the commit log: Thanks Jason!

 MAINTAINERS | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index d4fdcb12616c..36d58b1d3323 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -7765,10 +7765,9 @@ F:	include/keys/
 F:	security/keys/

 KGDB / KDB /debug_core
-M:	Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
+M:	Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
 W:	http://kgdb.wiki.kernel.org/
 L:	kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net
-T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jwessel/kgdb.git
 S:	Maintained
 F:	Documentation/dev-tools/kgdb.rst
 F:	drivers/misc/kgdbts.c
--
2.14.2

Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: kgdb: Replace Jason with Daniel

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 05 Dec 2017, Daniel Thompson wrote:

> ... with many, many thanks for Jason for all his hard work.
> 
> Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
> ---
> 
> Notes:
>     Over the years Jason has become increasingly hard to get hold off
>     and I think he must now be regarded as inactive.
>     
>     Patches in kgdb-next (mine as it happens) have been there for over a
>     year without a corresponding pull request and a couple of architecture
>     specific kgdb fixes have ended up missing a release cycle (or two) as
>     the architecture maintainer waits for an Acked-by from Jason.
>     
>     In the past I've had to rely on Andrew M. to land my own changes to
>     kgdb and in the v4.14 cycle you'll find my Acked-by on b8347c219649
>     ("x86/debug: Handle warnings before the notifier chain, to fix KGDB
>     crash"). That I was sharing surrogate acks convinced me we need a
>     change here and I've offered Jason help via private e-mail without
>     reply.
>     
>     So, I really would prefer it it if this patch listed me as a
>     co-maintainer or, failing that, as least had Jason's blessing... but
>     it doesn't. I certainly suggest this patch takes a long time in
>     review, and if it doesn't attract Jason's attention then I can only
>     reiterate what is says in the commit log: Thanks Jason!
> 
>  MAINTAINERS | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

It looks like Jason has been inactive in all aspects of upstream
maintainership and as a contributor for well over a year now.

I strongly support the move to make Daniel KGDB Maintainer:

  Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>

(NB: If this patch does not receive any opposition by the end of this
cycle, it would be my pleasure to take it through one of my trees.) 

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [Kgdb-bugreport] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: kgdb: Replace Jason with Daniel

[Jason Wessel]

On 12/05/2017 08:09 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Dec 2017, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> 
>> ... with many, many thanks for Jason for all his hard work.
>>
>> Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>
>> Notes:
>>      Over the years Jason has become increasingly hard to get hold off
>>      and I think he must now be regarded as inactive.
>>      
>>      Patches in kgdb-next (mine as it happens) have been there for over a
>>      year without a corresponding pull request and a couple of architecture
>>      specific kgdb fixes have ended up missing a release cycle (or two) as
>>      the architecture maintainer waits for an Acked-by from Jason.
>>      
>>      In the past I've had to rely on Andrew M. to land my own changes to
>>      kgdb and in the v4.14 cycle you'll find my Acked-by on b8347c219649
>>      ("x86/debug: Handle warnings before the notifier chain, to fix KGDB
>>      crash"). That I was sharing surrogate acks convinced me we need a
>>      change here and I've offered Jason help via private e-mail without
>>      reply.
>>      
>>      So, I really would prefer it it if this patch listed me as a
>>      co-maintainer or, failing that, as least had Jason's blessing... but
>>      it doesn't. I certainly suggest this patch takes a long time in
>>      review, and if it doesn't attract Jason's attention then I can only
>>      reiterate what is says in the commit log: Thanks Jason!
>>
>>   MAINTAINERS | 3 +--
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> It looks like Jason has been inactive in all aspects of upstream
> maintainership and as a contributor for well over a year now.

I have not been working directly on upstream kernel contributions for quite some time.  It doesn't mean I haven't been involved with kernel development.  Patches that I have reviewed or suggested to other developers generally don't bare my name.  I wouldn't mind trying to take a slightly more gradual passing of the baton and add Daniel as co-maintainer for a while before I retire from kernel work and merge myself away in the coming years. :-)

I have a series of 50+ patches for kgdb/kdb/usb which have never been published.  I am not saying that we actually need any of those patches, but it would be nice to let the community decide, and we can see if there is anything worth merging into the next cycle or future work with other maintainers.   My kernel.org tree stopped working a long time ago, probably from inactivity.  I'll see if that can get restored in the next few days, or I'll use my github tree and send the unpublished work to the mailing list as an RFC.  And for what it is worth if none of this happens by the end of 4.16, by all means Daniel has my blessing to be the sole maintainer.

Many thanks to Daniel for his contributions!

Cheers,
Jason.

Re: [Kgdb-bugreport] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: kgdb: Replace Jason with Daniel

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 05 Dec 2017, Jason Wessel wrote:

> On 12/05/2017 08:09 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, 05 Dec 2017, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > 
> > > ... with many, many thanks for Jason for all his hard work.
> > > 
> > > Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > Notes:
> > >      Over the years Jason has become increasingly hard to get hold off
> > >      and I think he must now be regarded as inactive.
> > >      Patches in kgdb-next (mine as it happens) have been there for over a
> > >      year without a corresponding pull request and a couple of architecture
> > >      specific kgdb fixes have ended up missing a release cycle (or two) as
> > >      the architecture maintainer waits for an Acked-by from Jason.
> > >      In the past I've had to rely on Andrew M. to land my own changes to
> > >      kgdb and in the v4.14 cycle you'll find my Acked-by on b8347c219649
> > >      ("x86/debug: Handle warnings before the notifier chain, to fix KGDB
> > >      crash"). That I was sharing surrogate acks convinced me we need a
> > >      change here and I've offered Jason help via private e-mail without
> > >      reply.
> > >      So, I really would prefer it it if this patch listed me as a
> > >      co-maintainer or, failing that, as least had Jason's blessing... but
> > >      it doesn't. I certainly suggest this patch takes a long time in
> > >      review, and if it doesn't attract Jason's attention then I can only
> > >      reiterate what is says in the commit log: Thanks Jason!
> > > 
> > >   MAINTAINERS | 3 +--
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > It looks like Jason has been inactive in all aspects of upstream
> > maintainership and as a contributor for well over a year now.
> 
> I have not been working directly on upstream kernel contributions
> for quite some time.  It doesn't mean I haven't been involved with
> kernel development.  Patches that I have reviewed or suggested to
> other developers generally don't bare my name.  I wouldn't mind
> trying to take a slightly more gradual passing of the baton and add
> Daniel as co-maintainer for a while before I retire from kernel work
> and merge myself away in the coming years. :-) 
> 
> I have a series of 50+ patches for kgdb/kdb/usb which have never
> been published.  I am not saying that we actually need any of those
> patches, but it would be nice to let the community decide, and we
> can see if there is anything worth merging into the next cycle or
> future work with other maintainers.   My kernel.org tree stopped
> working a long time ago, probably from inactivity.  I'll see if that
> can get restored in the next few days, or I'll use my github tree
> and send the unpublished work to the mailing list as an RFC.  And
> for what it is worth if none of this happens by the end of 4.16, by
> all means Daniel has my blessing to be the sole maintainer.

Thanks for your reply Jason.

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable way forward.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [Kgdb-bugreport] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: kgdb: Replace Jason with Daniel

[Daniel Thompson]

On 05/12/17 14:37, Jason Wessel wrote:
> On 12/05/2017 08:09 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Tue, 05 Dec 2017, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> ... with many, many thanks for Jason for all his hard work.
>>>
>>> Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Notes:
>>>      Over the years Jason has become increasingly hard to get hold off
>>>      and I think he must now be regarded as inactive.
>>>      Patches in kgdb-next (mine as it happens) have been there for 
>>> over a
>>>      year without a corresponding pull request and a couple of 
>>> architecture
>>>      specific kgdb fixes have ended up missing a release cycle (or 
>>> two) as
>>>      the architecture maintainer waits for an Acked-by from Jason.
>>>      In the past I've had to rely on Andrew M. to land my own changes to
>>>      kgdb and in the v4.14 cycle you'll find my Acked-by on b8347c219649
>>>      ("x86/debug: Handle warnings before the notifier chain, to fix KGDB
>>>      crash"). That I was sharing surrogate acks convinced me we need a
>>>      change here and I've offered Jason help via private e-mail without
>>>      reply.
>>>      So, I really would prefer it it if this patch listed me as a
>>>      co-maintainer or, failing that, as least had Jason's blessing... 
>>> but
>>>      it doesn't. I certainly suggest this patch takes a long time in
>>>      review, and if it doesn't attract Jason's attention then I can only
>>>      reiterate what is says in the commit log: Thanks Jason!
>>>
>>>   MAINTAINERS | 3 +--
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> It looks like Jason has been inactive in all aspects of upstream
>> maintainership and as a contributor for well over a year now.
> 
> I have not been working directly on upstream kernel contributions for 
> quite some time.  It doesn't mean I haven't been involved with kernel 
> development.  Patches that I have reviewed or suggested to other 
> developers generally don't bare my name.  I wouldn't mind trying to take 
> a slightly more gradual passing of the baton and add Daniel as 
> co-maintainer for a while before I retire from kernel work and merge 
> myself away in the coming years. :-)

Great to hear from you again! I shall consider this patch nacked or the 
time being ;-)... and if you are happy with help from me I shall leave 
it to you to propose an update to MAINTAINERS.


> I have a series of 50+ patches for kgdb/kdb/usb which have never been 
> published.  I am not saying that we actually need any of those patches, 
> but it would be nice to let the community decide, and we can see if 
> there is anything worth merging into the next cycle or future work with 
> other maintainers.   My kernel.org tree stopped working a long time ago, 
> probably from inactivity.  I'll see if that can get restored in the next 
> few days, or I'll use my github tree and send the unpublished work to 
> the mailing list as an RFC.

I, for one, would be interested to see these.


Daniel.

Re: [Kgdb-bugreport] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: kgdb: Replace Jason with Daniel

[Randy Dunlap]

On 12/05/2017 06:55 AM, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On 05/12/17 14:37, Jason Wessel wrote:
>> On 12/05/2017 08:09 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Tue, 05 Dec 2017, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>>>
>>>> ... with many, many thanks for Jason for all his hard work.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Notes:
>>>>      Over the years Jason has become increasingly hard to get hold off
>>>>      and I think he must now be regarded as inactive.
>>>>      Patches in kgdb-next (mine as it happens) have been there for over a
>>>>      year without a corresponding pull request and a couple of architecture
>>>>      specific kgdb fixes have ended up missing a release cycle (or two) as
>>>>      the architecture maintainer waits for an Acked-by from Jason.
>>>>      In the past I've had to rely on Andrew M. to land my own changes to
>>>>      kgdb and in the v4.14 cycle you'll find my Acked-by on b8347c219649
>>>>      ("x86/debug: Handle warnings before the notifier chain, to fix KGDB
>>>>      crash"). That I was sharing surrogate acks convinced me we need a
>>>>      change here and I've offered Jason help via private e-mail without
>>>>      reply.
>>>>      So, I really would prefer it it if this patch listed me as a
>>>>      co-maintainer or, failing that, as least had Jason's blessing... but
>>>>      it doesn't. I certainly suggest this patch takes a long time in
>>>>      review, and if it doesn't attract Jason's attention then I can only
>>>>      reiterate what is says in the commit log: Thanks Jason!
>>>>
>>>>   MAINTAINERS | 3 +--
>>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> It looks like Jason has been inactive in all aspects of upstream
>>> maintainership and as a contributor for well over a year now.
>>
>> I have not been working directly on upstream kernel contributions for quite some time.  It doesn't mean I haven't been involved with kernel development.  Patches that I have reviewed or suggested to other developers generally don't bare my name.  I wouldn't mind trying to take a slightly more gradual passing of the baton and add Daniel as co-maintainer for a while before I retire from kernel work and merge myself away in the coming years. :-)
> 
> Great to hear from you again! I shall consider this patch nacked or the time being ;-)... and if you are happy with help from me I shall leave it to you to propose an update to MAINTAINERS.
> 
> 
>> I have a series of 50+ patches for kgdb/kdb/usb which have never been published.  I am not saying that we actually need any of those patches, but it would be nice to let the community decide, and we can see if there is anything worth merging into the next cycle or future work with other maintainers.   My kernel.org tree stopped working a long time ago, probably from inactivity.  I'll see if that can get restored in the next few days, or I'll use my github tree and send the unpublished work to the mailing list as an RFC.
> 
> I, for one, would be interested to see these.

Me also.  I have 3 kdb patches that I just made.


-- 
~Randy

Re: [Kgdb-bugreport] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: kgdb: Replace Jason with Daniel

[Jason Wessel]

On 12/05/2017 10:42 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 12/05/2017 06:55 AM, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>> On 05/12/17 14:37, Jason Wessel wrote:
>>> I have a series of 50+ patches for kgdb/kdb/usb which have never been published.  I am not saying that we actually need any of those patches, but it would be nice to let the community decide, and we can see if there is anything worth merging into the next cycle or future work with other maintainers.   My kernel.org tree stopped working a long time ago, probably from inactivity.  I'll see if that can get restored in the next few days, or I'll use my github tree and send the unpublished work to the mailing list as an RFC.
>>
>> I, for one, would be interested to see these.
> 
> Me also.  I have 3 kdb patches that I just made.
> 
> 

If you have some patches please do send them along to the list.  I have added Daniel as an additional maintainer for when I am not around.

We are open for business again now that my kernel.org tree accepts my tag signing again.  It will take some time to go through these unpublished patches to see what is actually relevant, but I'll posting some of them to the mailing reasonably list soon.

Cheers,
Jason.

ps

While on the topic of debuggers...  I was thinking it might be interesting to have a gdb-serial stub in an FPGA for debugging the kernel not unlike what was done with the firewire debugger that Andi Kleen worked on long ago.  I am not exactly sure what kind of run control options exist there but in terms of accessing memory it would certainly be plausible to access it.  One option I know that is plausible for run control is a small kernel interrupt handler perhaps for the run control interface based on the fact you can some FPGAs show up like a PCI device.

While I haven't been directly working in upstream linux in last year or two, I still do plenty of debugging of full systems with simulators, hardware, and now FPGAs too.  :-)