Note to all: I'm on the road this week (having had a holiday last week)
and will be somewhat slow in replying on these threads, but I will be
sure to get to them all.
Yes, nobody likes 2 implementations. I guess Roland and me hate
CONFIG_UTRACE much more than anybody else.
:-) We both hate
On Wed 2009-11-25 16:48:18, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 09:01:27PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Hello.
This is the new iteration of Roland's utrace patch, this time
with rewrite-ptrace-via-utrace + cleanups in utrace core.
1-7 are already in -mm tree, I am
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:24:41PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
FYI, the merge window has not opened yet, so it cannot close in a few
days.
subsystems merged window, not Linus'.
[...] and thus not getting any of the broad -next test coverage is a
pretty bad idea. In the end it will be
On 11/27, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:24:41PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
FYI, it's been in -mm, that's where it's maintained.
None of the recent mm snapshots has anything utrace related in there,
Well, not that I think this is important, but...
Two weeks ago we
* Christoph Hellwig h...@infradead.org wrote:
[...] Given that's it's pretty much too later for the 2.6.33 cycle
anyway I'd suggest you make sure the remaining two major architectures
(arm and mips) get converted, and if the remaining minor architectures
don't manage to get their
* Christoph Hellwig h...@infradead.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:10:52AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
[...] Given that's it's pretty much too later for the 2.6.33 cycle
anyway I'd suggest you make sure the remaining two major architectures
(arm and mips) get converted, and if
On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 12:37 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
Hi Christoph,
The other thing is that this patchset really doesn't quite justify
utrace. It's growing a lot more code without actually growing any
useful functionality. What about all those other utrace killer
features
On 11/26, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
What the patches in the current form do is to introduce two different
ptrace implementations, with one used on the architectures getting most
testing and another secondary one for left over embedded or dead
architectures with horrible results.
Yes, nobody
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 09:01:27PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Hello.
This is the new iteration of Roland's utrace patch, this time
with rewrite-ptrace-via-utrace + cleanups in utrace core.
1-7 are already in -mm tree, I am sending them to simplify the
review.
8-12 don not change the
On 11/25, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
I ran the ptrace-tests testsuite [1] on powerpc on the vanilla ptrace
and then with ptrace/utrace. The results for ptrace/utrace look better
:-)
Great! thanks a lot Ananth for doing this.
ptrace-utrace still fails 2 tests,
FAIL: syscall-reset
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 09:01:27PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Hello.
This is the new iteration of Roland's utrace patch, this time
with rewrite-ptrace-via-utrace + cleanups in utrace core.
1-7 are already in -mm tree, I am sending them to simplify the
review.
8-12 don not change the
On 11/25, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 09:01:27PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Hello.
This is the new iteration of Roland's utrace patch, this time
with rewrite-ptrace-via-utrace + cleanups in utrace core.
1-7 are already in -mm tree, I am sending them to simplify
Hi Christoph,
The other thing is that this patchset really doesn't quite justify
utrace. It's growing a lot more code without actually growing any
useful functionality. What about all those other utrace killer
features that have been promised for a long time?
We are working on
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 04:40:52PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 11/25, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
I ran the ptrace-tests testsuite [1] on powerpc on the vanilla ptrace
and then with ptrace/utrace. The results for ptrace/utrace look better
:-)
Great! thanks a lot Ananth for
14 matches
Mail list logo
