From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753305Ab3EFJ1E (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2013 05:27:04 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f52.google.com ([74.125.83.52]:36240 "EHLO mail-ee0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752502Ab3EFJ1D (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2013 05:27:03 -0400 Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 11:26:58 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Paul Gortmaker Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Frederic Weisbecker , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/2] sched: move content out of core files for load calculations Message-ID: <20130506092657.GA9227@gmail.com> References: <1366398650-31599-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <20130421091846.GE31470@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130421091846.GE31470@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > > Recent activity has had a focus on moving functionally related blocks of > > stuff out of sched/core.c into stand-alone files. The code relating to load > > calculations has grown significantly enough recently to warrant placing it in > > a separate file. > > > > Here we do that, and in doing so, we shed ~20k of code from sched/core.c (~10%). > > > > A couple small static functions in the core sched.h header were also localized > > to their singular user in sched/fair.c at the same time, with the goal to also > > reduce the amount of "broadcast" content in that sched.h file. > > > > Paul. > > --- > > > > v2 changes: > > > > 1) rebase from tip's sched/core (v3.9-rc1-38-gb329fd5) to today's > > tip master (v3.9-rc6-2031-g27f8b76). > > 2) rename file from load_avg.c to proc.c > > Thanks, looks good to me. Note, I'll try to apply this after the initial > round of trees went to Linus in the merge window, to reduce interactions > between the trees. [...] Ok, all relevant trees are now upstream - mind sending a refreshed series against upstream merge commit 534c97b0950b or later? Thanks, Ingo