Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:40:27 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [perfmon] Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 merge news |
| |
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:24:36 +1100 Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote:
> Andrew Morton writes: > > > I was hoping that after the round of release-and-review which Stephane, > > Andi and I did about twelve months ago that we were on track to merge the > > perfmon codebase as-offered. But now it turns out that the sentiment is > > that the code simply has too many bells-and-whistles to be acceptable. > > Whose sentiment?
Andi and hch, maybe others I've forgotten about.
> I've had a bit of a look at it today together with David Gibson. Our > impression is that the latest version is a lot cleaner and simpler > than it used to be. I'm also reading Stephane's technical report > which describes the interface, and whilst I'm only part-way through > it, I haven't seen anything yet which strikes me as unnecessary or > overly complicated.
Yes, that's quite possible. I don't know how up-to-date people's knowledge is. I know I haven't looked seriously at the code in around twelve months.
Let's get it on the wires as outlined and take a look at it all. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |