linux-kernel - Re: [patch] sched_clock(): cleanups, #2

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070525191447.GA19412@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 25 May 2007 21:14:47 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [patch] sched_clock(): cleanups, #2

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Ingo: to make things easier, the _best_ split-up would be not "this is 
> the historical series of patches leading up to CFS v15" or something 
> like that, but it would be nice to get that final CFS version as a 
> series of patches that do some specific things rather than as one 
> final one. Is there any possibility that could happen?

sure enough, i'll work something sane out - i already have it partly 
split up. It will probably be something along the lines of: 'remove 
stuff that we can remove and still have functional scheduling' followed 
by an 'add minimal CFS patch' and then nicely split up 'CFS related 
add-ons' (like the task-stats accounting things, debugging, etc). Do you 
think i should try to split up the core CFS bits some more beyond this 
level? (that would be quite nontrivial i suspect)

	Ingo
-
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/