Well,

the basic reason is that the patches on developerworks are meant to be
applied on an
unchanged "vanilla" kernel as from http://www.kernel.org

Every distributor patches the kernel in a way so that the patches on
developerworks
may or may not apply cleanly. Apart from applying, it is also the question
whether
the compiled kernel (with distributor specific patches together with the
patches from
developerworks) works as expected.

The intention of developerworks was (and still is) to provide code for the
vanilla kernel
so that everyone can have a look at them, can roll their own system and can
provide
feedback. So, in a way it is IBM's Linux/390 interface to the Open Source
world.
Patches are labelled "recommended", if the pass the tests, otherwise  - if
they are still in
development or the testers have not run all their testcases - they are
marked "experimental".

In parallel, we are working actively to get the recommended patches
integrated into the mainstream places (official kernel tree, official gcc
tree, etc.).

Developerworks is also the interface to all distribution partners. Just as
they have the original kernel sources as well as a huge amount of other
sources and experience for their own kernel (and other tools), they use
developerworks as one of their sources.

So, regarding the timer patch (and other code on developerworks) you have
several choices:
Roll your own with the vanilla kernel and the description which patches
have to be applied in which order.
Roll your own with the distribution kernel and resolve the problems (here
the --dryrun option of patch might be of help).
Ask your distribution partner to provide an update of their distribution
(or ask about their plans) which includes the features you need.

Kind regards,
Christoph

Reply via email to