[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <390583962.4154938.1438701620927.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 11:20:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@...hat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
dzickus@...hat.com, atomlin@...hat.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
eranian@...gle.com, cmetcalf@...hip.com, fweisbec@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] watchdog: introduce watchdog_park_threads() and
watchdog_unpark_threads()
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@...nel.org>
...
> On Sat 01-08-15 14:49:22, Ulrich Obergfell wrote:
>> These functions are intended to be used only from inside kernel/watchdog.c
>> to park/unpark all watchdog threads that are specified in watchdog_cpumask.
>
> I would suggest merging this into Patch2. It is usually better to add
> new functions along with their users.
Michal,
watchdog_{park|unpark}_threads are called by watchdog_{suspend|resume}
in Patch 2/4 and by update_watchdog_all_cpus() in Patch 3/4, so I would
have to merge three patches into one, and I would end up with one large
patch and one smaller patch. I think the result would be harder to read,
review and understand. Thus I'd prefer to leave the patches split as they
currently are.
Regards,
Uli
--
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