[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1182516038.5493.29.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 08:40:38 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/6] Split out tasklets from softirq.c
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 08:11 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:00:16AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Tasklets are really a separate entity from softirqs, so they
> > deserve their own file. Also this allows us to easily replace
> > tasklets for something else ;-)
>
> It's a bit pointless when softirq.h still always includes it. A while
> ago I had a patch that split it out and made all users include it directly.
> But reviving this patch would be rather pointless if we just want to kill
> tasklets in the end anyway.
>
Actually, if these patches do make it into -mm, then patches 1-4 should
make it into Linus's tree. That will make Andrews maintenance of these
patches much easier, since they would make the -mm changes not so
intrusive.
Since the stripping out of tasklets is more of a cosmetic change and
does not change functionality of the kernel, I don't see why it can't
make it up to Linus's tree. Especially if we are planning on removing
tasklets all together.
-- Steve
-
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