From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [linux-cifs-client] [PATCH] cifs: wrap cifs_dnotify_thread in CONFIG_BROKEN Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:13:07 -0500 Message-ID: <20090123001306.GA2176@infradead.org> References: <1232642078-9717-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <20090122210655.GA6065@infradead.org> <524f69650901221513m7857488by6713eca64ee31681@mail.gmail.com> <20090122183115.1cef1b53@tleilax.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Steve French , Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs-client@lists.samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Layton Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:54469 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755203AbZAWANT (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:13:19 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090122183115.1cef1b53@tleilax.poochiereds.net> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 06:31:15PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > Removing this kthread won't measurably move us farther away from that > goal either. > > It's currently under CONFIG_CIFS_EXPERIMENTAL, which would be fine if > it actually did something. It doesn't though -- it just wakes up tasks > that don't need to be woken up. > > I have no issue with a kthread that does useful work, but why not remove > this kthread out of the mainline code for now and just plan to put it > back when it actually has something useful to do? > > The patch that removes it will live in perpetuity in git. It'll be a > trivial matter to revert it when you're ready to have the kthread do > real work. Yeah. Currently it's useless code. If a proper *notify implementation for cifs still needs a thread it can be added with that implementation, and I'm sure it'll look very different from the current one (at least after review..)