Re: [perfmon2] Forking perfmon2/libpfm into LKML and vendor branches
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
seranian
From: Stephane E. <er...@hp...> - 2007-11-17 17:29:29
|
Hello, On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 01:08:35PM -0800, Philip Mucci wrote: > > In light of the recent discussions, I would request as a vendor that > we fork perfmon2 into two branches: > > 1) That can be hacked up for the LKML folks into whatever form it needs > 2) One that runs on a stable kernel platform (I nominate 2.6.22) and > that only has bug fixes applied and contains the current supported > interface. I looked at how to deal with branches on CVS, I think this is fairly easy to do given the codebase that we have for libpfm. Looks to me like with have 2 issues to address with branches: 1/ need a development branch to track the to-lkml kernel GIT tree (in particular the changes to the kernel headers and syscall stubs) 2/ need a branch to track fully-featured (more stable) perfmon2 GIT tree and in particular the syscall number changes It looks to me like 2/ should translate in one branch per mainline kernel version. This way there would not be an issue with the syscall numbers changing over time. You'd have a 2.6.23, 2.6.24 branches and so on. So I am proposing that we keep the main branch as development and that we create stable branches for each kernel releases. Do we all agree on that? Thanks. -- -Stephane |