lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 4/5] RCU: Add TASK_RCU_OFFSET
    From
    Date
    On Thu, 2011-03-31 at 17:50 +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
    > On 03/31/2011 04:04 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > > On Thu, 2011-03-31 at 09:02 +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
    > >> I like this cleanup, could you continue for this hard job? I will help
    > >> you if required.
    > >>
    > >> Ingo & Peter - will you accept the patches when it is done.
    > >>
    > > No, like I said, I think the proposed patch is utterly horrid.
    > >
    >
    > But how about my kernel-offset.c patch? It is clean & simple,
    > it just seems not so normal.
    >
    > If the proposed splitting patch is horrid, I think we will try to
    > update it as you expect.
    >
    > If splitting sched.h is wrong, I will try to persuade more people
    > accept the kernel-offset.c patch.

    Well, I'm all for cleaning up sched.h, it includes way too much things
    not strongly related to kernel/sched*.c like a lot of the signal things
    and the misnamed signal_struct (should be called process_struct or
    somesuch).

    That also causes the inversion between sched.h and wait.h

    What I don't like is those _types.h headers, and definitely not the
    massive explosion of those as per the proposed patch.

    Nor do I quite get why all that is needed, sched_types which would
    define task_struct still needs the new task_rcu_struct bits, and as per
    the patch you need to split the rcu headers into two. Once you've done
    that, I don't see why sched.h still needs splitting too.




    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-03-31 13:21    [W:0.023 / U:0.640 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site