[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131105081838.27c7fcd4@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 08:18:38 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, oleg@...hat.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
willy@...ux.intel.com, tglx@...utronix.de, airlied@...il.com,
maarten.lankhorst@...onical.com, walken@...gle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Move locking primitives into kernel/locking/
On Tue, 05 Nov 2013 13:10:44 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> During Kernel Summit Dave mentioned that there wasn't a clear maintainer for
> locking bits.
>
> To remedy this Ingo suggested gathering all the various locking primitives and
> lockdep into a single place: kernel/locking/.
>
> I would further like to propose a MAINTAINERS entry like:
>
> LOCKING
> M: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> M: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> M: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> M: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> M: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git locking/core
> S: Maintained
> F: kernel/locking/
I wonder if it should be called kernel/locks, as that's less to type,
smaller path names, and tastes good on bagels.
-- Steve
>
> Because for most 'fun' locking discussions we usually end up with at least
> those people anyway :-)
>
--
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