From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>,
hch@infradead.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, pj@sgi.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:22:07 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080108192207.4646e574.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1199846820.17010.166.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:47:00 -0800 Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> ...
> > > Am I to conclude then that there's no point in addressing the issues other
> > > people pointed out? While I (obviously, since I submitted the patch disagree),
> > > I'm not certain how others feel. My main point for disagreement here is (I'm
> > > sorry to repeat this) that as long as certain code isn't allowed into the kernel
> > > I think it is not unreasonable to at least expect the kernel to provide some
> > > fundamental infrastructure that can be used for those (supposedly
> > > unacceptable) bits. All I did here was utilizing the base infrastructure I want
> > > added to clean up code that appeared pretty ad-hoc.
> > >
> >
> > Ah. That's a brand new requirement.
>
> In all fairness it's not really a brand new requirement -- just one that
> wasn't strongly emphasized during prior attempts to get something like
> this in.
>
> I had a mostly-working patch for this on top of the Task Watchers v2
> patch set. I never posted that specific patch because it had a race with
> module unloading and the fix only increased the overhead you were
> unhappy with. I mentioned it briefly in my lengthy [PATCH 0/X]
> description for Task Watchers v2 (http://lwn.net/Articles/207873/):
>
> "TODO:
> ...
> I'm working on three more patches that add support for creating a task
> watcher from within a module using an ELF section. They haven't recieved
> as much attention since I've been focusing on measuring the performance
> impact of these patches."
>
> <snip>
>
> Would tainting the kernel upon registration of out-of-tree "notifiers"
> be more acceptable?
How does that work? module.c does the register/deregister on behalf of the
module?
I certainly encourage people to disagreee with me here, but my current
thinking is:
- the cleanup aspect isn't worth the runtime overhead and
- the support-modular-users aspect is largely new and would need a lot
more description and justification (with examples) before we can even
begin to evaluate it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-09 3:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-20 13:11 [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Jan Beulich
2007-12-20 22:25 ` Ingo Oeser
2007-12-21 7:36 ` Jan Beulich
2007-12-23 12:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-12-25 22:05 ` Andrew Morton
2008-01-08 13:38 ` Jan Beulich
2008-01-08 22:14 ` Andrew Morton
2008-01-09 0:03 ` Paul Jackson
2008-01-09 0:31 ` Andrew Morton
2008-01-09 2:47 ` Matt Helsley
2008-01-09 3:22 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-01-09 9:52 ` Jan Beulich
2008-01-09 10:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-01-09 2:24 ` Matt Helsley
2008-01-09 3:27 ` Matthew Helsley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080108192207.4646e574.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=erikj@sgi.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=pagg@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox