Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] cleaning up the sysctls table (hung_task watchdog) | From | Xiaoming Ni <> | Date | Tue, 19 May 2020 09:13:41 +0800 |
| |
On 2020/5/19 1:16, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:59:53AM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote: >> Kernel/sysctl.c contains more than 190 interface files, and there are a >> large number of config macro controls. When modifying the sysctl >> interface directly in kernel/sysctl.c, conflicts are very easy to occur. >> E.g: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/10/413. > > FWIW un the future please avoid using lkmk.org and instead use > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/<MESSAGE-ID> for references. > >> Use register_sysctl() to register the sysctl interface to avoid >> merge conflicts when different features modify sysctl.c at the same time. >> >> So consider cleaning up the sysctls table, details are in: >> https://kernelnewbies.org/KernelProjects/proc >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/13/990 >> >> The current patch set extracts register_sysctl_init and some sysctl_vals >> variables, and clears the interface of hung_task and watchdog in sysctl.c. >> >> The current patch set is based on commit b9bbe6ed63b2b9 ("Linux 5.7-rc6"), >> which conflicts with the latest branch of linux-next: >> 9b4caf6941fc41d ("kernel / hung_task.c: introduce sysctl to print >> all traces when a hung task is detected") >> >> Should I modify to make patch based on the "linux-next" branch to avoid >> conflicts, or other branches? > > If you can do that, that would be appreciated. I have a sysctl fs cleanup > stuff, so I can take your patches, and put my work ont op of yours and > then send this to Andrew once done. > > Luis > Ok, I will redo the v4 version based on the linux-next branch as soon as possible
I want to continue to participate in the subsequent sysctl cleanup, how to push the subsequent cleanup patch to your series, and minimize conflict
Thanks Xiaoming Ni
| |