[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1111081317160.18135@tux.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 13:20:46 +0200 (EET)
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
Vince Weaver <vince@...ter.net>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org list" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
qemu-devel Developers <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@...il.com>,
Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [F.A.Q.] perf ABI backwards and forwards compatibility
On Tue, 8 Nov 2011, Theodore Tso wrote:
> It's great to hear that! But in that case, there's an experiment we
> can't really run, which is if perf had been developed in a separate
> tree, would it have been just as successful?
Experiment, eh?
We have the staging tree because it's a widely acknowledged belief that
kernel code in the tree tends to improve over time compared to code that's
sitting out of the tree. Are you disputing that belief?
If you don't dispute that, what makes you think the same effect
doesn't apply to code that looks like Linux code and is developed the same
way but runs in userspace?
Pekka
--
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