lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 24 Apr 2012 11:10:12 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>,
	Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>,
	David Sharp <dhsharp@...gle.com>,
	Vaibhav Nagarnaik <vnagarnaik@...gle.com>,
	Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>, Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Our failure on tracing tools unification (Was: Re: [RFC][PATCH
 00/15] tools: Unify perf and trace-cmd trace event format parsing v2)

On Mon, 23 Apr 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 16:47 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Ingo doesn't seem to want this library outside perf in order to avoid
> > the fragmentation of the efforts on tracing tools.
> 
> I really don't see the point.. parsing /debug/tracing/events/*/format
> gunk really is separate, furthermore things like powertop et al already
> are separate projects and really need this lib.
> 
> I mean, who gives a bother where all that crap lives, if its in the
> kernel tree its all close enough to keep an eye on.. its not like
> kernel/events/ and kernel/trace/ are the same directory.
> 
> Ingo, please could you lighten up and let people get stuff done? Merging
> the two implementations, wherever the result lives, is a better
> situation that two dis-joint implementations. So either let Frederic
> work or do it yourself but don't hand-wave and road-block stuff.

So you are saying that we have patches for a fully unified library and
block it just because we have religious debates about the directory in
which the library code should be?

Some folks should really visit their shrinks!

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ