On Wed, 2 Jun 2021 01:11:07 +0000 HAGIO KAZUHITO(萩尾 一仁) <k-hagio-ab@xxxxxxx> wrote: > -----Original Message----- > > On Tue, 1 Jun 2021 10:40:09 +0200 David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Thanks, i explained the reason during my last reply. > > > > Andrew has already picked this patch to -mm tree. > > > > > > Just because it's in Andrews tree doesn't mean it will end up upstream. ;) > > > > > > Anyhow, no really strong opinion, it's simply unnecessary code churn > > > that makes bisecting harder without real value IMHO. > > > > I think it's a good change - mem_sections refers to multiple instances > > of a mem_section. Churn is a pain, but that's the price we pay for more > > readable code. And for having screwed it up originally ;) > > >From a makedumpfile/crash-utility viewpoint, I don't deny kernel improvement > and probably the change will not be hard for them to support, but I'd like > you to remember that the tool users will need to update them for the change. > > The situation where we need to update the tools for new kernels is usual, but > there are not many cases that they cannot even start session, and this change > will cause it. Personally I wonder the change is worth forcing users to update > them. Didn't know that. I guess I'll drop it then. We could do an assembly-level alias I assume..
