From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4 tip/sched/core] sched: rename preempt_notifier to sched_notifier and always enable it Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:38:02 +0900 Message-ID: <4B0F73CA.7090804@kernel.org> References: <1259234619.4273.32.camel@twins> <20091126115605.GA15189@elte.hu> <1259239259.4273.82.camel@twins> <4B0F356B.3040206@kernel.org> <20091127045209.GA13914@elte.hu> <4B0F65DD.1090707@kernel.org> <20091127054621.GA25672@elte.hu> <4B0F6B32.4090401@kernel.org> <20091127061319.GA8620@elte.hu> <4B0F6EA9.6070105@kernel.org> <20091127062147.GB22149@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:60257 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750729AbZK0Gi1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:38:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20091127062147.GB22149@elte.hu> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , Fr??d??ric Weisbecker , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" Hello, 11/27/2009 03:21 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> No, I'm not gonna do that. Just patches to reorganize code so that >> unnecessary conflicts won't occur. There will be NO functional >> changes. > > Not without the other changes - which you want to do too, right? The extra things I want can stay in a devel branch until notifiers get cleaned up and it will only be a few patches which aren't very likely to cause conflicts when it gets exported for linux-next or other testing branches. > Please send all sched.c modifications via the scheduler tree. Going > via other trees is fine when there's agreement by the maintainers - > but this is one of the rare cases where that's not the case. Yeah, sure. So, two patchsets. One for sched/core doing pure reorganization without any functional changes. The other for sched/notifier (or whatever name you would prefer) which is purely for development and testing and will not be pushed to Linus unless it receives notifier framework cleanup. wq#for-next will pull from sched/notifier and be exported to linux-next but it will never be submitted to Linus until sched/notifier is cleaned up. Am I understanding it correctly? Thanks. -- tejun