On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 10:47:45AM -0800, Philip Mucci wrote:"somber"? Why? We (a number of the kernel developers) want to see the perfmon code make it into the kernel tree, unfortunatly, in the current state it is in, that's not going to happen. Andi specified a way that this can happen, just refactor your patches into smaller bits that can be reviewed and applied. If you, or anyone else has any questions about this, please let us know. So far, I have not seen any response to his message, so I'm guessing that the perfmon developers either are off working on this, or don't care. And if they don't care, then yes, I agree with your "somber" feeling... thanks, greg k-h -
| david | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 004/196] Chinese: add translation of SubmittingPatches |
| Paul Jackson | Re: cpuset-remove-sched-domain-hooks-from-cpusets |
| Rafael J. Wysocki | [Bug #11210] libata badness |
| David Miller | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Andrew Morton | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
git: | |
