lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] De-macro spin_trylock_irq, spin_trylock_irqsave, write_trylock_irqsave

    * Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de> wrote:

    > >> (but it would also be hugely invasive, with not much upside with
    > >> tons of downside like years of migration fallout and having to
    > >> rewrite hundreds of kernel hacking books ;-) )
    > >
    > > I want my money back for scheduler chapter from "Understanding the
    > > Linux Kernel"!
    >
    > I agree that this argument of Ingo's is not a very good one... ;)

    i see the smiley, but still - there's a huge difference between the
    "pain" caused by a much better scheduler [ hey, did you expect me to say
    anything else? ;-) ] and a rather arbitrary value->pointer parametering
    change to a core API that is used _everywhere_.

    Ingo


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-08-17 11:33    [W:0.045 / U:61.496 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site