On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 04:25:53PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 12:23:10AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote: > > It would also be nice to balance this out with the utrace merge, as both > > are going to cause quite a lot of pain on the architecture side. > > I don't think a utrace merge as in one big merge is going to happen ever. > It's just a too big patch doing too many things at once. And the flag day > for switching all architectures over is another blocker.
I agree with Christoph - the fact that *all* architectures have to be either ptrace or utrace make it very very painful. What would be good is if some effort could be made by the utrace- interested parties to make the transition to utrace much less painful. For instance, I quite like the getregs/setregs abstractions, and it looks like these *could* be self-contained in a single patch. It would be nice if we could move architectures over to this one a time. Once that's in, that's one chunk of utrace merged. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/