* Steven Rostedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Steven Rostedt writes:
Can I add your Acked-by: to all these patches that I submitted? I'm going
to recommit them with a consistent subject (all lower case ppc), but I'm
not going to change
Ingo Molnar writes:
and it's all in flux (we are in the middle of the development cycle),
so i dont think it would be a good idea for you to pull those bits
into the powerpc tree.
Quite. OK, it does sound like this stuff needs to live in your tree
for now, and from the diffstat it doesn't
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
Maybe Steve could do the following trick: create a Linus -git based
branch that uses the new APIs but marks ppc's ftrace as depends 0 in
the powerpc Kconfig. (the new ftrace.c wont build)
There's only two generic commits that need to be added for
Ingo Molnar writes:
* Steven Rostedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Steven Rostedt writes:
Can I add your Acked-by: to all these patches that I submitted? I'm
going
to recommit them with a consistent subject (all lower case ppc),
Paul and Benjamin,
Can I add your Acked-by: to all these patches that I submitted? I'm going
to recommit them with a consistent subject (all lower case ppc), but I'm
not going to change the patches themselves.
Would you two be fine with that? Or at least one of you?
-- Steve
Steven Rostedt writes:
Can I add your Acked-by: to all these patches that I submitted? I'm going
to recommit them with a consistent subject (all lower case ppc), but I'm
not going to change the patches themselves.
Would you two be fine with that? Or at least one of you?
My preference
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Steven Rostedt writes:
Can I add your Acked-by: to all these patches that I submitted? I'm going
to recommit them with a consistent subject (all lower case ppc), but I'm
not going to change the patches themselves.
Would you two be fine
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Steven Rostedt writes:
The following patches are for my work on porting the new dynamic ftrace
framework to PowerPC. The issue I had with both PPC64 and PPC32 is
that the calls to mcount are 24 bit jumps. Since the modules are
loaded in
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Paul Mackerras wrote:
I've tested the following patches on both PPC64 and PPC32. I will
admit that the PPC64 does not seem that stable, but neither does the
code when all this is not enabled ;-) I'll debug it more to
The following patches are for my work on porting the new dynamic ftrace
framework to PowerPC. The issue I had with both PPC64 and PPC32 is
that the calls to mcount are 24 bit jumps. Since the modules are
loaded in vmalloc address space, the call to mcount is farther than
what a 24 bit jump can
Steven Rostedt writes:
The following patches are for my work on porting the new dynamic ftrace
framework to PowerPC. The issue I had with both PPC64 and PPC32 is
that the calls to mcount are 24 bit jumps. Since the modules are
loaded in vmalloc address space, the call to mcount is farther
11 matches
Mail list logo
