On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Maxim Levitsky wrote:I won't even consider pulling it unless it's offered as a separate tree, not mixed up with other things. At that point I can give a look. That said, I explained to Ingo why I'm not particularly interested in it. I don't think that "developer-centric" debugging is really even remotely our problem, and that I'm personally a lot more interested in infrastructure that helps normal users give better bug-reports. And kgdb isn't even _remotely_ it. So I'd merge a patch that puts oops information (or the whole console printout) in the Intel management stuff in a heartbeat. That code is likely much grottier than any kgdb thing will ever be (Intel really screwed up the interface and made it some insane XML thing), but it's also fundamentally more important - if it means that normal users can give oops reports after they happened in X (or, these days, probably more commonly during suspend/resume) and the machine just died. kgdb? Not so interesting. We have many more hard problems happening at user sites, not in developer hands. Linus --
| Hiten Pandya | Re: up? (emacs docbook xml ide) |
| David Newall | Re: Slow DOWN, please!!! |
| Greg KH | Re: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] Fixing the Kernel Janitors project |
| James Morris | Re: LSM conversion to static interface |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
