[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070124225205.GA5220@gnuppy.monkey.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:52:05 -0800
From: Bill Huey (hui) <billh@...ppy.monkey.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Bill Huey (hui)" <billh@...ppy.monkey.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lock stat for -rt 2.6.20-rc2-rt2.2.lock_stat.patch
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:31:15PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Bill Huey <billh@...ppy.monkey.org> wrote:
>
> > Patch here:
> >
> > http://mmlinux.sourceforge.net/public/patch-2.6.20-rc2-rt2.2.lock_stat.patch
>
> hm, most of the review feedback i gave has not been addressed in the
> patch above. So i did it myself: find below various fixups for problems
> i outlined plus for a few other problems as well (ontop of
> 2.3.lock_stat).
Sorry, I've been siliently keeping your suggested change in my private
repo without announcing it to the world. I'll reply to the old email in
another message at length.
http://mmlinux.sourceforge.net/public/patch-2.6.20-rc2-rt2.4.lock_stat.patch
> While it's now markedly better it's still not quite mergeable, for
> example the build fails quite spectacularly if LOCK_STAT is disabled in
> the .config.
I'll look into it. I've been focused on clean up and a couple of other
things regard the stability of this patch. Making small changes in it
tends to make the kernel crash hard and I suspect that it's an interaction
problem with lockdep and that I need to turn lockdep off when hitting
"lock stats" locks. I'm going to move to "__raw_..." locks...
Meanwhile please wait until I hand interpret and merge your changes to an
older patch into my latest stuff. If it's takes too long, I suggest keeping
out of the tree for a bit until I finish this round unless something is
pressing for this to happen now like a mass change to the spinlock macros
or something. I stalled a bit trying to get Peter Zijlstra an extra feature.
> Also, it would be nice to replace those #ifdef CONFIG_LOCK_STAT changes
> in rtmutex.c with some nice inline functions that do nothing on
> !CONFIG_LOCK_STAT.
I'll look into it. Not sure what your choice in style is here and I'm
open to suggestions. I'm also interested in a reduction of #define
identifier length if you or somebody else has some kind of good convention
to suggest.
> but in general i'm positive about the direction this is heading, it just
> needs more work.
Sorry, for the lag. Trying to juggle this and the current demands of my
employeer contributed to this lag unfortunately.
bill
-
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