[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871w0nygbd.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 14:30:30 +0200
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, torvalds@...l.org,
akpm@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] De-macro spin_trylock_irq, spin_trylock_irqsave, write_trylock_irqsave
Hi Ingo,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> writes:
> * Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de> wrote:
>
>> >> (but it would also be hugely invasive, with not much upside with
>> >> tons of downside like years of migration fallout and having to
>> >> rewrite hundreds of kernel hacking books ;-) )
>> >
>> > I want my money back for scheduler chapter from "Understanding the
>> > Linux Kernel"!
>>
>> I agree that this argument of Ingo's is not a very good one... ;)
>
> i see the smiley, but still - there's a huge difference between the
> "pain" caused by a much better scheduler [ hey, did you expect me to say
> anything else? ;-) ] and a rather arbitrary value->pointer parametering
> change to a core API that is used _everywhere_.
I just meant the thing about the books. What you said about the
invasive manner, the migration costs and the missing upside I fully
agree with.
Hannes
--
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