[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160615220539.GA30921@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:05:39 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/12] rcu: Move expedited code from tree.c
to tree_exp.h
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 02:46:05PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> People have been having some difficulty finding their way around the
> RCU code. This commit therefore pulls some of the expedited grace-period
> code from tree.c to a new tree_exp.h file. This commit is strictly code
> movement, with the exception of a forward declaration that was added
> for the sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup() function.
>
> A subsequent commit will move the remaining expedited grace-period code
> from tree_plugin.h to tree_exp.h.
Part of the problem for me is always the fact that its so weirdly
divided over these files. Now you're making that worse. How is this
helping?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists