Message-ID: <CAGdX0WEd18R2ARysi0z0MhWXYhsrGaBJEp_eJFViKg4Xhbpmhw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 24 Oct 2013 20:44:35 +0800
From:	Jovi Zhangwei <jovi.zhangwei@...il.com>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"zhangwei(Jovi)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: ktap inclusion in drivers/staging/?

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 04:46:00AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 09:58 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> > Greg,
>> >
>> > I was surprised to see 'ktap' appear in the staging tree silently,
>> > via these commits that are visible in today's staging-next:
>> >
>> >  2c856b9e3e06 staging: ktap: remove unused <asm/syscall.h> header file
>> >  687b63a3bfd5 staging: ktap: update email name in MAINTAINERS
>> >  c63a164271f8 staging: ktap: add to the kernel tree
>> >
>> > ktap is pretty fresh instrumentation code, announced on lkml a
>> > couple of months ago, and so far I haven't seen much technical
>> > discussion of integrating ktap upstream, mostly I suspect because
>> > not a _single_ patch was sent to linux-kernel for review. (!)
>>
>> I feel I'm partially to blame. Jovi has sent us several emails to look
>> at his tree and I told him I would when I get time. What I should have
>> done was told him to break up the changes and send them out as a patch
>> series.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > An announcement of a Git tree was made (which Git tree is not very
>> > structured), and some very minimal discussion ensued, but no actual
>> > patches were sent with an intent to merge, no technical arguments
>> > were made in favor of merging and nothing conclusive was achieved.
>>
>> Again, this may be partially our fault. We should have told Jovi to send
>> out the patches and a pointer to a git tree is not acceptable. Then we
>> could have had the necessary discussions required for this.
>>
>> But I agree, this should not be just dumped into the staging tree until
>> the patches themselves have been posted and reviewed.
>>
>> I'll have to NAK it too.
>
> Ok, I've just talked to Ingo in person about this, and I will revert the
> ktap code, and work with Jovi to get this merged "properly" for 3.14 or
> so.  I do want to audit/change the user/kernel interface in ktap as I'm
> not sold on the current one, so after I get that done, I'll work to get
> a set of patches created to merge this to the "real" part of the kernel.
>
> Jovi, sorry about this, but the good news is that everyone seems to
> agree that this is the way to do this properly, so the end result will
> be good for everyone involved.  Again, great job with creating ktap, it
> seems that it fills a real need that people are happy to see
> implemented.
>
Greg, I'm the person need to say sorry, my fault, you helped me a lot.

I will cleanup the code before sending patch series to review.

Jovi
--
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