On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 1:33 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: [snip] > > > like the BTF approach is significantly better and said users are > > > hopefully moving forward to it quickly, and if they can't move > > > forward, then they're likely also not going to move forward to newer > > > kernels either? > > > > I think BCC runs on a lot of upstream machines. I think the migration > > strategy is a matter of opinion, one way is to take it out and cause some > > pain in the hope that users/tools will migrate soon (while probably carrying > > the reverted patches out of tree). Another is to migrate the tools first and > > then take it out (which has its own disadvantages such as introducing even > > more users of it while it is still upstream). > > Do we "know" what tools today require this, and what needs to be done to > "fix" them? If we don't know that, then there's no way to drop this, > pretty much ever :( Is there a real reason to drop it or a problem dropping this solves though? thanks, - Joel
