[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A4BB6D5.4030203@billgatliff.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:19:49 -0500
From: Bill Gatliff <bgat@...lgatliff.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Hui Zhu <teawater@...il.com>, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
dhowells@...hat.com, Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix the multithread program core thread message error
Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> I'd have though that having gdb produce crap for all the threads would
> be fairly irritating to ARM developers and hence we should backport
> this. But perhaps it doens't affect many people, dunno.
>
> What do poeple think?
>
Not backporting would provide an incentive for people to step up to a
more modern kernel. :)
One can always backport later if the situation really requires it. I
say let it be.
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
bgat@...lgatliff.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists