[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D931814.9090100@suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:46:28 +0200
From: Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] RCU: Add TASK_RCU_OFFSET
On 30.3.2011 12:57, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 12:55 +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
>> Subject: [PATCH] headers: Allow for lightweight inclusion of task_struct definition
>>
>> Factor out a couple of type definitions to <header>_types.h to allow
>> using task_struct without pulling tons of new dependencies via sched.h.
>
> Urgh, not pretty.. so why not clean up sched.h properly? There's way too
> much cruft in there.
It was a proof-of-concept to show that it is doable to have proper
definition of task_struct in rcupdate.h. Not an entry for any code
beauty contest.
Michal
--
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