Hello everyone, See message below.
Looks like the merge is not going to happen anytime soon and that we have to start from scratch again ;-< I must admit I am disappointed, I have done quite a lot lately to make requested changes quickly, cleanup, follow the rules and guidelines, but it seems I will have to do this all over again. I am certainly not willing to give up. I think many people don't quite understand the complexity of the hardware and usage models that we have to deal with. Sticking with the lowest common denominator is not the solution, we would pass on some very powerful features. I will go over the code again and look for opportunities to simplify as much as I can. If you have suggestions, they are welcome. Also as Andrew is suggesting, I will likely need your help to make the case to justify everything that is in there. Thanks. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 12:06:27PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 16:34:54 -0800 > Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Here's a patch against my current tree that gets the perfmon code > > building and hopefully working. > > Unfortunately I still haven't merged perfmon due to recently-occurring > minor conflicts with Tony's ia64 tree and more major recently-occurring > conflicts with the x86 tree. > > There's not really a lot which Stephane can practically do about this - > normally I'll just get down and fix stuff like this up. But the impression > I get from various people is that the perfmon tree in its present form > would not be a popular merge. > > The impression which people have (and I admit to sharing it) is that > there's just too much stuff in there and it might not all be justifiable. > But I suspect that people have largely forgotten what is in there, and why > it is in there. > > We really need to get this ball rolling, and that will require a sustained > effort from more people than just Stephane. I suppose as a starting point > we could yet again review the existing patches, please. People will mainly > concentrate upon the changelogging to understand which features are being > proposed and why, so that submission should describe these things pretty > carefully: what are the features and why do we need each of them. > > tia. -- -Stephane _______________________________________________ perfmon mailing list [email protected] http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/perfmon/
