Subject: Re: linux-next: add utrace tree

From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:24:48 -0500

Hi -

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 05:59:59PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> [...]
> > Including experimental code that is RFC and which is not certain to go 
> > upstream is certainly not the purpose of linux-next though.
> 
> Ingo is correct in what he says here.  See the boilerplate:
> [...]
> Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
> to fetch)."
> I will remove this tree from linux-next tomorrow and wait until it is
> more ready for mainline inclusion.

Please reconsider.  Ingo mistook what was being proposed.  We request
merge/integration testing for just the set of patches posted
<http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/17/466>, which was in response to
peterz's earlier review comments, and none of which is labeled or
considered RFC or experimental.

Ananth was right that the utrace-ptrace git branch represents this
rather than master.

- FChE