From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932131AbXACXHH (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jan 2007 18:07:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932163AbXACXHH (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jan 2007 18:07:07 -0500 Received: from emailhub.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:4996 "HELO mailout.stusta.mhn.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932131AbXACXHF (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jan 2007 18:07:05 -0500 Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 00:07:08 +0100 From: Adrian Bunk To: Stephane Eranian Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@suse.de Subject: Re: [PATCH] add i386 idle notifier (take 3) Message-ID: <20070103230708.GM20714@stusta.de> References: <20061220140500.GB30752@frankl.hpl.hp.com> <20061220210514.42ed08cc.akpm@osdl.org> <20061221091242.GA32601@frankl.hpl.hp.com> <20061222010641.GK6993@stusta.de> <20061222100700.GB1895@frankl.hpl.hp.com> <20061223114015.GQ6993@stusta.de> <20070103132015.GE7238@frankl.hpl.hp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070103132015.GE7238@frankl.hpl.hp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 05:20:15AM -0800, Stephane Eranian wrote: > Adrian, > > On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 12:40:15PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > > > If you look at the perfmon-new-base patch, you'll see a base.diff patch which > > > includes this one. I am slowly getting rid of this requirement by pushing > > > those "infrastructure patches" to mainline so that the perfmon patch gets > > > smaller over time. Submitting smaller patches makes it easier for maintainers > > > to integrate. > > > > No, the preferred way is to start with getting both the infrastructure > > and the users into -mm. > > > > Adding infrastructure without users doesn't fit into the kernel > > development model. > > I am hearing conflicting opinions on this one. > > Perfmon is a fairly big patch. It is hard to take it as one. I have tried to > split it up in smaller, more manageable pieces as requested by top-level > maintainers. This process implies that I supply small patches which may not > necessarily have users just yet. There should be a big patchset consisting of manageable pieces, if possible all of it in -mm. > > The unused x86-64 idle notifiers are now bloating the kernel since > > nearly one year. > > > > > > And why does it bloat the kernel with EXPORT_SYMBOL's although even your > > > > perfmon-new-base-061204 doesn't seem to add any modular user? > > > > > Where does the perfmon code use the EXPORT_SYMBOL's? > > The perfmon patch includes several kernel modules which make use of > the exported entry points. The following symbols are exported: > > pfm_pmu_register/pfm_pmu_unregister: > * PMU description module registration. > * Used to describe PMU model. > * Used by perfmon_p4.c, perfmon_core.c, perfmon_mckinley.c, and others > > pfm_fmt_register/pfm_fmt_unregister: > * Sampling format module registration > * Used by perfmon_dfl_smpl.c, perfmon_pebs_smpl.c > > pfm_interrupt_handler: > * PMU interrupt handler > * Used by MIPS-specific perfmon code > > pfm_pmu_conf/pfm_controls: > * global state/control variable > > All exported symbols are currently used. Why are you saying this adds bloat? Which module uses idle_notifier_register/idle_notifier_unregister? > -Stephane cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed