[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1708010011390.5981@knanqh.ubzr>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2017 00:23:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] futex: split PI support to a file of its own
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> But I really do not agree with your reasoning about easier to understand
> and maintain. I have the dubious pleasure to stare into that code on a
> regular base. PI and non PI share a lot of code and it's really not helping
> to have two separate files to stare at. That makes following the PI code
> even harder than it is already. So I rather like to see that PI code in an
> #ifdef block and not split out into its own file.
OK. And in fact I think I now managed to keep #ifdef's to a very small
number, counting on dead code elimination instead. Please see next
patch.
> Please provide a diffstat along with the patch next time.
Hmmm... was supposed to be there. For the record it was:
include/linux/futex.h | 7 +-
init/Kconfig | 7 +-
kernel/futex.c | 1559 +-----------------------------------------
kernel/futex_pi.c | 1563 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 1598 insertions(+), 1538 deletions(-)
Admitedly not small. But when PI is disabled then futex.o shrinks by
roughly the half of its original size. So a lot of code is dedicated to
PI.
Nicolas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists