[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+ekxPWF2+UQEPTbsi1zCCF4Tg8ubpmv7nX=_OqJw1gMb_2mXA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 19:56:49 -0600
From: Jeffrey Merkey <jeffmerkey@...il.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v4.6] MDB Linux Kernel Debugger x86/x86_64
On 3/25/16, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 17:01:27 -0600 Jeffrey Merkey <jeffmerkey@...il.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I went back and checked the code and as it turns out, none of the
>> patches you nak'd are in the current branch, there are different
>> patches there now. There are two patches you ignored that are in it,
>> but no record of a Nak for either of them.
>
> OK, so one obvious problem is that the tree you want merged has a
> single patch in it and the diffstat looks like this:
>
> Documentation/sysrq.txt | 2 +-
> MAINTAINERS | 6 +
> arch/x86/include/asm/bug.h | 9 +-
> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/debugreg.h | 1 +
> arch/x86/kernel/Makefile | 1 +
> arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c | 2 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/Makefile | 3 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/Makefile | 6 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/Makefile.local | 106 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-base.c | 3293 +++++++++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-base.h | 447 ++
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-ia-apic.c | 243 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-ia-proc.h | 819 ++++
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-ia-support.c | 5342 +++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-ia-support.h | 76 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-ia.c | 6887
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-ia.h | 209 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-keyboard.h | 127 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-list.c | 534 +++
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-list.h | 96 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-logic.c | 2118 +++++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-main.c | 786 ++++
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-os.c | 1474 ++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-os.h | 141 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb-proc.h | 179 +
> arch/x86/kernel/debug/mdb/mdb.h | 40 +
> arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c | 6 +-
> arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_64.c | 18 +
> arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c | 69 +-
> arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c | 1 +
> arch/x86/kernel/traps.c | 14 +
> drivers/tty/vt/vt.c | 4 +
> include/asm-generic/bug.h | 4 +
> include/linux/console.h | 4 +
> kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_debugger.c | 2 +-
> kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c | 2 +
> kernel/extable.c | 1 +
> kernel/kallsyms.c | 45 +
> kernel/module.c | 43 +
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 1 +
> kernel/sched/core.c | 13 +-
> kernel/time/clocksource.c | 1 +
> kernel/watchdog.c | 17 +-
> lib/Kconfig.debug | 66 +
> 44 files changed, 23240 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> Having it in that form makes it pretty hard for anyone to review ...
>
> If you have a set if incremental patches, maybe you should post those
> instead.
>
> I am afraid that if the maintainers affected by this code will not
> merge it, I cannot justify putting it in linux-next myself.
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
I am not going to waste time arguing with the maintainers and chasing
after them. I have a debugger, it has lots of users and a big
installed base that goes back many years. So long as they can get it
and use it, things are cool. Putting it in Linux is actually more of
a pain than just doing what I have been over the years and maintaining
it alongside linux.
Each merge cycle it will be submitted for the linux community, but
like I said, I am not wasting time with folks who are not my customers
and or really not that interested in it.
I already played the bait and switch game with Ingo once before and I
did a lot a work and it was ignored, so he can waste someone else's
time. Linux is only as good as the people maintaining it.
Jeff
Powered by blists - more mailing lists