[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100122005147.GD22003@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:51:47 -0500
From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Fr??d??ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
utrace-devel@...hat.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: add utrace tree
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?
- FChE
--
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