[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1160321570.3693.34.camel@c-67-180-230-165.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2006 08:32:50 -0700
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To: tglx@...utronix.de
Cc: akpm@...l.org, johnstul@...ibm.com, mingo@...e.hu,
zippel@...ux-m68k.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: + clocksource-add-generic-sched_clock.patch added to -mm tree
On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 16:51 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 07:45 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 11:55 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 18:53 -0700, akpm@...l.org wrote:
> > > > Adds a generic sched_clock, along with a boot time override for the scheduler
> > > > clocksource (sched_clocksource). Hopefully the config option would eventually
> > > > be removed.
> > >
> > > Again, this belongs into the clocksource code and not into sched.c
> > >
> > > Your patch series scatters clock source related code snippets all over
> > > the place. This becomes simply a maintenance nightmare.
> >
> > It's an API, it's suppose to be used in different places.
>
> Err. clocksource is an API and it is supposed to be at a place, where
> clocksource code is.
Agreed on this.
> sched_clock is a user of the clocksource API and there is absolutely no
> reason to put that into sched.c
We could do something like kernel/time/sched_clock.c ? I really don't
like the idea of stuff sched_clock() , and timekeeping back into
clocksource.
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists