From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com (mail-wi0-f173.google.com [209.85.212.173]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5EB76B0032 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 04:59:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: by widdi4 with SMTP id di4so13962398wid.0 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2015 01:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from radon.swed.at (a.ns.miles-group.at. [95.130.255.143]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dl8si3248634wib.11.2015.04.24.01.59.57 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 24 Apr 2015 01:59:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <553A05E9.7040601@nod.at> Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 10:59:21 +0200 From: Richard Weinberger MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/10] an introduction of library operating system for Linux (LibOS) References: <1429263374-57517-1-git-send-email-tazaki@sfc.wide.ad.jp> <1429450104-47619-1-git-send-email-tazaki@sfc.wide.ad.jp> <5539F370.9070704@nod.at> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Hajime Tazaki Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, corbet@lwn.net, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org, rientjes@google.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, jdike@addtoit.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, upa@haeena.net, christoph.paasch@gmail.com, mathieu.lacage@gmail.com, libos-nuse@googlegroups.com Hi! Am 24.04.2015 um 10:22 schrieb Hajime Tazaki: >> You *really* need to shape up wrt the build process. > > at the moment, the implementation of libos can't automate to > follow such changes in the build process. but good news is > it's a trivial task to follow up the latest function. > > my observation on this manual follow up since around 3.7 > kernel (2.5 yrs ago) is that these changes mostly happened > during merge-window of each new version, and the fix only > takes a couple of hours at maximum. > > I think I can survive with these changes but I'd like to ask > broader opinions. > > > one more question: > > I'd really like to have a suggestion on which tree I should > base for libos tree. > > I'm proposing a patchset to arnd/asm-generic tree (which I > believe the base tree for new arch/), while the patchset is > tested with davem/net-next tree because right now libos is > only for net/. > > shall I propose a patchset based on Linus' tree instead ? I'd suggest the following: Maintain LibOS in your git tree and follow Linus' tree. Make sure that all kernel releases build and work. This way you can experiment with automation and other stuff. If it works well you can ask for mainline inclusion after a few kernel releases. Your git history will show how much maintenance burden LibOS has and how much with every merge window breaks and needs manual fixup. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org