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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans