[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0907170838091.13838@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 08:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, tglx@...utronix.de,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] net: serialize hrtimer callback in sched_cbq
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> How would something like the below work for people?
This looks saner.
It was the insanity of having the core timer code know about different
modes that caused all the sily problems.
Having a separate abstraction layer for "I want to get a softirq timeout"
sounds fine, as long as the timer code itself never cares.
That said, I don't think this shoud be a "hrtimer" issue (reflected in
your naming and include file choice). I think this is a softirq or tasklet
(or whatever) issue, and should be named that way.
Why should the timer code (and header files) care about how you can use
tasklets with them? It shouldn't. The timers should be seen as the really
low-level critical code, and the timer code should never need to know
about softirq's or tasklets or whatever.
So I think you shouldmove it to kernel/softirq.c.
Linus
--
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