From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755487AbYIQUNf (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:13:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753396AbYIQUN1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:13:27 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:44715 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752845AbYIQUN0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:13:26 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type: organization:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=YOOy7kD226DBvrZsZ4AjL4k1Xnksj0Xk+F7W0+e/yAD3Lqd16QiKKgjRKa5cQb5XP 7WffwUsIK5vzd2+os9wXQ== Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.27-rc5 resubmit] Fix itimer/many thread hang. From: Frank Mayhar To: Roland McGrath Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel , Thomas Gleixner , Alexey Dobriyan , Andrew Morton , Oleg Nesterov In-Reply-To: <20080917191333.6FA7E640A5@pipsqueak.localdomain> References: <1221238479.30136.2.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> <20080914150651.GK12522@elte.hu> <20080914150923.GB26984@elte.hu> <1221502142.19012.35.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> <20080916084143.GC17287@elte.hu> <1221678187.13420.17.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> <20080917191333.6FA7E640A5@pipsqueak.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Google, Inc. Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:12:31 -0700 Message-Id: <1221682351.13420.19.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 12:13 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > I had been thinking not so much about code size, but about the unnecessary > indirection and allocation for the UP case. I'm happy to defer to Ingo on > whether to worry about that. Yeah, I was just responding to his request for a code-size check. I'm okay either way, although making the data structures consistent between the two cases does simplify the code a bit. The next patch is waiting on Ingo's verdict. :-) -- Frank Mayhar Google, Inc.