linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Linus <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: upcoming percpu changes
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 17:21:20 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B750F80.2030902@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100205161648.086375b9.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>

Hello, Stephen.

On 02/05/2010 02:16 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 16:09:11 +1100
> Subject: [PATCH] percpu: add __percpu for sparse
> 
> This is to make the annotation of percpu variables during the next merge
> window less painfull.
> 
> Extracted from a patch by Rusty Russell.

I started doing this and it's a bit ridiculous.  If I split the
patches into separate trees with maintainers, I end up with a lot of
one or several liners and all that those patches do is adding __percpu
to a variable or field declaration which doesn't affect normal builds
at all.  The only conflicts I had against the current mainline is the
ones which got changed in the percpu tree by Christoph's patches.

Given the wide number of trees this will end up on and given the
triviality of each change, I think it would better to keep these in
the percpu tree.  It'll make things harder track without adding much
benefit.  If non-trivial confict ever happens, please feel free to
drop it from linux-next and let me know.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-02-12  8:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-05  5:16 upcoming percpu changes Stephen Rothwell
2010-02-05  5:48 ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-05  7:09   ` Ingo Molnar
2010-02-05  7:31     ` Tejun Heo
2010-02-05  7:29       ` Ingo Molnar
2010-02-12  8:21 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2010-02-12 11:10   ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-02-12 13:23     ` Tejun Heo

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=4B750F80.2030902@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).