[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgZ=Ssx4qoeuaHet1vx+8M36j0a3q2aw5ePapWm=KnSfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 14:04:38 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] LTTng upstreaming next steps
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 at 13:37, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> If LTTng were to be in tree, it would be much easier to work on a strategy
> to merge the infrastructure as the maintainers of both would have better
> access to each other's code.
That's not a bet I'd take.
If people haven't unified this in the last two decades, I'm noty going
to take the argument of "hey, merge it because *then* it will be
unified".
Because honestly, that sounds like a total fairy tale to me: "the
princess came along and kissed the toad, and he turned into a
beautiful price, and they lived happily ever after".
So no. I don't believe in fairy tales. Not when we have two decades of
"that didn't happen".
If people can unify this and merge it incrementally, that's one thing.
Until then, you're just making stuff up.
"Show me the code", in other words.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists