From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754479AbZBQAl7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:41:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751252AbZBQAlu (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:41:50 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:51166 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751232AbZBQAlu (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:41:50 -0500 Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:40:54 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds X-X-Sender: torvalds@localhost.localdomain To: Peter Zijlstra cc: Nick Piggin , Jens Axboe , "Paul E. McKenney" , Ingo Molnar , Rusty Russell , Steven Rostedt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] generic-smp: remove kmalloc usage In-Reply-To: <20090216164114.521787803@chello.nl> Message-ID: References: <20090216163847.431174825@chello.nl> <20090216164114.521787803@chello.nl> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Now that there is no strict need for kmalloc anymore, and nobody seems to > rely it for the queueing behaviour, remove it. Peter, I really hate this series. Why? In 1/4 you introduce that cfd RCU thing, and then in 2/4 you remove it again. I realize that you seem to do that in order to do some incremental step-wise changes, but quite frankly, it just complicates the whole series and makes the patches much harder to read and follow. Why don't you just combine patches 1&2? That split-up seems to just confuse things. At least it confuses me. Why does it happen? Linus