From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/7] epoll keyed wakeups - introduce key-aware wakeup macros
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 14:06:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090131130646.GA3986@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901301953280.3150@localhost.localdomain>
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Would be nice to see the kernel image size increase due to this change
> > (which gives a good measure about how much of an issue this is).
>
> Ingo, I don't think you have looked at that header file for a while.
>
> It's already doing that, Davide just changed the names a bit:
>
> #define wake_up_interruptible(x) __wake_up(x, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 1, NULL)
>
> and the extra parameter is already there in the caller.
Yeah, indeed - i should have noticed the absense of new function
prototypes in the patch ... and in any case i shouldnt post at 4am ;)
> (Yeah, Davide did add it to __wake_up_locked and __wake_up_sync, but
> those are really not the common cases).
>
> Sure, we can change those #define's to be actual functions (and perhaps
> not export the low-level __wake_up() functions at all), since it's true
> that it would probably shrink the kernel size, but that is really a
> totally independent issue from the whole epoll wakeups thing.
Yeah. Will have a look at that independently of Davide's patch.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-31 13:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-31 3:25 [patch 3/7] epoll keyed wakeups - introduce key-aware wakeup macros Davide Libenzi
2009-01-31 3:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-31 3:50 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-01-31 3:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-31 13:06 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-01-31 18:57 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-01-31 9:25 ` Alan Cox
2009-01-31 19:03 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-01-31 3:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-31 4:01 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-01-31 4:57 ` wli
2009-01-31 19:08 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-01-31 21:28 ` wli
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=20090131130646.GA3986@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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