[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100512202628.GK15159@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 16:26:28 -0400
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: mingo@...e.hu, peterz@...radead.org, gorcunov@...il.com,
aris@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
randy.dunlap@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] [nmi watchdog] touch_softlockup cleanups and
softlockup_tick removal
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:06:54PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
> > index 1083897..1fec781 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sysctl.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
> > @@ -827,15 +827,6 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
> > .extra1 = &zero,
> > .extra2 = &one,
> > },
> > - {
> > - .procname = "softlockup_thresh",
> > - .data = &softlockup_thresh,
> > - .maxlen = sizeof(int),
> > - .mode = 0644,
> > - .proc_handler = proc_dosoftlockup_thresh,
> > - .extra1 = &neg_one,
> > - .extra2 = &sixty,
> > - },
>
>
>
> I wonder about the ABI breakage.
>
> But I suspect few userspace tools use it though, since this is
> mostly for kernel dev.
There is no breakage, this chunk of code was duplicated later in the file.
I am just removing the duplicated bits to simplify the SOFTLOCKUP Kconfig
stuff.
Cheers,
Don
--
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