[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5n62kpipakytp6u7be24ltvhwqryztoe5goorgrnserwnrwfyt@owbkj3pezq55>
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2026 14:28:05 -0500
From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...mlin.com>
To: Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>
Cc: sean@...e.io, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, joel.granados@...nel.org, pmladek@...e.com, mhiramat@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [v5 PATCH 1/2] hung_task: Introduce helper for hung task warning
On Thu, Jan 01, 2026 at 05:49:59PM +0800, Lance Yang wrote:
> I am wondering whether we should leave that code as-is to
> avoid unnecessary churn ...
>
> That code was not particularly complex or duplicated :)
Hi Lance,
While I agree the current logic is simple, separating the verbose reporting
from the detection loop significantly improves the readability of
check_hung_task(). This refactoring introduces no runtime overhead
(static inline) while providing a cleaner, encapsulated structure for any
future diagnostic enhancements.
Kind regards,
--
Aaron Tomlin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists