* Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > You know, they said the same thing about oprofile. All you needed > > to do was to write few simple shell scripts to make it work. One > > of the key features of tools/kvm is 'as little configuration as > > possible' and I can assure you that bash alias is really not a > > solution for that. > > I like perf. Really. But I still don't see why it wouldn't be able > to live in its own tree either. Is the reason that the people who develop it prefer integration with the kernel tree not enough for you? perf could possibly be ported to other OSs. Maybe some day someone will try that. But unless that project actually replaces the perf project, or perf developers move out of the kernel en masse due to difficulties with the development model i don't see why the project would want to move out of the kernel tree. In fact my observations as a perf maintainer show the exact opposite: most perf developers are 100% happy to get their stuff merged and upstream ASAP. They do not buffer big patch-queues just to not have to deal with an integrated kernel tree. The integrated tree is a natural model of development to them and often perf tooling patches come mixed with kernel side patches such as new tracepoints or cleanups/fixes to related kernel code, so it's all very convenient. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
