* David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:06:54 +0200 > > > ... but these are the wrong patches, they should be removed or > > reverted and redone properly. > > Given the number of users of net-next-2.6, removal via rebasing > is simply not an option. The other two posibilities, sure... > > > It's not just about keeping kernel/trace/* changes in the > > tracing tree (which we can relax on-demand given agreement), > > it's that these patches are also _wrong_ and we cannot relax > > anything about that. > > Why don't we give Neil a chance to review the situation and fix > things up? > > If revert is the final decision, that's fine, I'll revert > everything. > > But in the mean time at least give Neil a chance to read all of > your feedback and coordinate a way to fix things with everyone. Oh, sure. Conversion to TRACE_EVENT() is equivalent to the revert of the current patches plus introduction of the TRACE_EVENT() defines. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
