lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 -tip] sched: Clean unused fields from struct rq

* Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >>
> >>> * Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 10:51:37PM +0000, Luis Henriques wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Since they are used on in statistics and are always set to zero, the following
> >>>>> fields from struct rq have been removed: yld_exp_empty, yld_act_empty and
> >>>>> yld_both_empty.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Both Sched Debug and SCHEDSTAT_VERSION versions has also been incremented since
> >>>>> ABIs have been changed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Hi Ingo,
> >>>>
> >>>> Sorry to bother you but I can not find this patch in -tip. Just
> >>>> would like to confirm with you that it was NACK'ed or you just
> >>>> forgot to merge it to the tree.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Was held up by the schedstat tool discussions. Please resend the
> >>> patch with a link to the updated tool in the commit log perhaps (if
> >>> such a link exists), and with Gregory's ack in place.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Ingo
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Hi Ingo,
> >> I was waiting to merge the tool patch until I was sure this would be
> >> your blessed v15 of the ABI. If you are comfy with the kernel patch but
> >> want the tool updated before the kernel, I can do that, no problem. The
> >> only thing that I ask is that if for some reason this kernel patch
> >> doesn't make it in, please require any future patches that change this
> >> ABI to be versioned > 15 ;)
> >>
> >
> > How about moving schedstat to Documentation/sched/schedstat.c or so?
> > It's small and trivial enough, and that way changes would go hand in
> > hand with the app.
> >
>
> Oh, I misunderstood. The tool patch I was referencing is for my
> schedtop tool that is in a separate tree and written in C++. In
> retrospect, you probably don't care about the relative state of my
> tool coincident with the kernel side change, then. I agree that
> this other schedstat tool should probably be in-tree and patched
> at the same time as Luis' kernel patch.
>
> FWIW: I have no problem with schedtop.cc going into the kernel as
> well if that is what you would like, but I figured I would be
> burned at the stake for suggestion such heresy as C++ in the tree
> ;)

i'd not mind it being added to the kernel tree, were it not for the
extremely serious danger of irreversible mental contamination :)

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-24 22:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans