Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 9 Oct 2013 08:08:06 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/16] sched/wait: Collapse __wait_event macros -v5 |
| |
* Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 08:28:43PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 01:40:56PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 09:47:18PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > [ . . . ] > > > > > > Should I be thinking about making a kernel/rcu? > > > > > > > > I wanted to raise it with you at the KS :-) > > > > > > Sorry for jumping the gun. ;-) > > > > > > > To me it would sure look nice to have kernel/rcu/tree.c, > > > > kernel/rcu/tiny.c, kernel/rcu/core.c, etc. > > > > > > > > [ ... and we would certainly also break new ground by introducing a > > > > "torture.c" file, for the first time in Linux kernel history! ;-) ] > > > > > > Ooh... I had better act fast! ;-) > > > > > > > But it's really your call, this is something you should only do if you are > > > > comfortable with it. > > > > > > I have actually been thinking about it off and on for some time. > > > > And here is a first cut. Just the renaming and needed adjustments, > > no splitting or merging of files. > > > > Thoughts? > > Wow! I rebased my commits destined for 3.14 on top of this, and "git > rebase" did it with several protests, but with no manual intervention > required.
Git is cool!
> Now if it actually still builds, boots, and runs... ;-)
Booting is overrated! ;-)
Seriously, this is good stuff.
Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
I'd definitely argue in favor of doing a mechanical move first, then any further reorganization separately.
(One minor detail I noticed: you'll probably need to update the RCU file patterns in MAINTAINERS as well.)
Thanks,
Ingo
| |