On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:51:47 -0500 "Frank Ch. Eigler" <f...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi - > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 04:31:45PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > [...] > > > Someone please sell this to us. > > Here's what Oleg said last time I asked this: [...] > > I wonder if Roland/Oleg are being too modest in their current role as > ptrace maintainers. Considering that *they* think of utrace as a > means toward proper refactoring of ptrace, how much further burden of > proof should they shoulder? To what extent are other subsystem > maintainers required to "sell" reworkings of their areas, when there > appear to be no drawbacks and at least arguable benefits? > ptrace is a nasty, complex part of the kernel which has a long history of problems, but it's all been pretty quiet in there for the the past few years. This leads one to expect that a rip-out-n-rewrite is a high-risk prospect. So, quite reasonably, one looks for a good reason for taking such risk. It's not really appropriate to generalise from other subsystem maintainer's reworkings onto ptrace. It's very rare that we'd make a change this radical to a tricky part of core kernel.
