lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/8] [nmi watchdog] touch_softlockup cleanups and softlockup_tick removal
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:28:35PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 04:26:28PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> > On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:06:54PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
> > > > index 1083897..1fec781 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/sysctl.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
> > > > @@ -827,15 +827,6 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
> > > > .extra1 = &zero,
> > > > .extra2 = &one,
> > > > },
> > > > - {
> > > > - .procname = "softlockup_thresh",
> > > > - .data = &softlockup_thresh,
> > > > - .maxlen = sizeof(int),
> > > > - .mode = 0644,
> > > > - .proc_handler = proc_dosoftlockup_thresh,
> > > > - .extra1 = &neg_one,
> > > > - .extra2 = &sixty,
> > > > - },
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I wonder about the ABI breakage.
> > >
> > > But I suspect few userspace tools use it though, since this is
> > > mostly for kernel dev.
> >
> > There is no breakage, this chunk of code was duplicated later in the file.
> > I am just removing the duplicated bits to simplify the SOFTLOCKUP Kconfig
> > stuff.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Don
>
>
> Ah right.
>
> BTW, if you address my reviews, please do it incrementally, I'm going
> to apply this set and push it to Ingo.

Ok, probably easier to review too. :-)

Cheers,
Don


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-12 22:59    [W:0.044 / U:2.864 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site