[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140522195056.445f2dcb@notabene.brown>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 19:50:56 +1000
From: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...hat.com,
Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SCHED: remove proliferation of wait_on_bit action
functions.
On Thu, 22 May 2014 11:05:02 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de> wrote:
>
> > [[ get_maintainer.pl suggested 61 email address for this patch.
> > I've trimmed that list somewhat. Hope I didn't miss anyone
> > important...
> > I'm hoping it will go in through the scheduler tree, but would
> > particularly like an Acked-by for the fscache parts. Other acks
> > welcome.
> > ]]
> >
> > The current "wait_on_bit" interface requires an 'action' function
> > to be provided which does the actual waiting.
> > There are over 20 such functions, many of them identical.
> > Most cases can be satisfied by one of just two functions, one
> > which uses io_schedule() and one which just uses schedule().
> >
> > So:
> > Rename wait_on_bit and wait_on_bit_lock to
> > wait_on_bit_action and wait_on_bit_lock_action
> > to make it explicit that they need an action function.
> >
> > Introduce new wait_on_bit{,_lock} and wait_on_bit{,_lock}_io
> > which are *not* given an action function but implicitly use
> > a standard one.
> > The decision to error-out if a signal is pending is now made
> > based on the 'mode' argument rather than being encoded in the action
> > function.
>
> this patch fails to build on x86-32 allyesconfigs.
Could you share the build errors?
>
> Could we keep the old names for a while, and remove them in the next
> cycle or so?
I don't see how changing the names later rather than now will reduce the
chance of errors... maybe I'm missing something.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists