[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1959671494.623.1522103965117.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 18:39:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>
Cc: rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@...com>,
linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, tracing: unbreak lttng
----- On Mar 26, 2018, at 6:25 PM, Alexei Starovoitov ast@...com wrote:
> On 3/26/18 3:15 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 15:08:45 -0700
>> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>>> for_each_kernel_tracepoint() is used by out-of-tree lttng module
>>> and therefore cannot be changed.
>>> Instead introduce kernel_tracepoint_find_by_name() to find
>>> tracepoint by name.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 9e9afbae6514 ("tracepoint: compute num_args at build time")
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
>>
>> I'm curious, why can't you rebase? The first patch was never acked.
>
> because I think it makes sense to keep such things in the commit log
> and in the separate diff, so next developer is aware of what kind of
> minefield the tracpoints are.
> No wonder some maintainers refuse to add them.
Since when has it become accepted to push commits into maintainer's
subsystems without their acknowledgment first ?
The minefield you are currently walking through appears to be of your
own making, so please just rework your initial patch before it reaches
upstream.
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists