Re: [PATCH] more deprectation bits

[Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 01:55:48PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Even if it's safe in that particular case, most code in the kernel runs
> > > without BKL.  This patch just makes the deprication of sleep_on
> > > explicit.
> >
> > This would be more appropriate:
> 
> I don't think so.  As you said before sleep_on is perfectly fine for
> the small part of code still covered by BKL, so we should not impose
> any runtime overhead (i.e. warnings) but rather remind at compile time.
> 
> That's what's so nice with the gcc extension (and you won't see it
> anyway as long as you stay at egcs 1.1 :))

Others will.  It will result in developers being distracted into "fixing"
non-bugs.  It will introduce risk and it will delay the release of the
2.6 kernel.

Please concentrate on things which *matter*.  Focus on getting this piece
of software into a deliverable state and do not be distracted into futzing
about with stuff which clearly was not addressed at the appropriate time.