Re: [PATCH 2/8] [nmi watchdog] touch_softlockup cleanups and softlockup_tick removal

[Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>]

On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:28:35PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 04:26:28PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> > On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:06:54PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
> > > > index 1083897..1fec781 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/sysctl.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
> > > > @@ -827,15 +827,6 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
> > > >  		.extra1		= &zero,
> > > >  		.extra2		= &one,
> > > >  	},
> > > > -	{
> > > > -		.procname	= "softlockup_thresh",
> > > > -		.data		= &softlockup_thresh,
> > > > -		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
> > > > -		.mode		= 0644,
> > > > -		.proc_handler	= proc_dosoftlockup_thresh,
> > > > -		.extra1		= &neg_one,
> > > > -		.extra2		= &sixty,
> > > > -	},
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I wonder about the ABI breakage.
> > > 
> > > But I suspect few userspace tools use it though, since this is
> > > mostly for kernel dev.
> > 
> > There is no breakage, this chunk of code was duplicated later in the file.
> > I am just removing the duplicated bits to simplify the SOFTLOCKUP Kconfig
> > stuff.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Don
> 
> 
> Ah right.
> 
> BTW, if you address my reviews, please do it incrementally, I'm going
> to apply this set and push it to Ingo.

Ok, probably easier to review too. :-)

Cheers,
Don