From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753409Ab0DVIvQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Apr 2010 04:51:16 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:52955 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752913Ab0DVIvP (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Apr 2010 04:51:15 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] perf: remove __weak function hw_perf_group_sched_in() From: Peter Zijlstra To: Lin Ming Cc: Ingo Molnar , "eranian@gmail.com" , "Gary.Mohr@Bull.com" , Corey Ashford , arjan@linux.intel.com, "Zhang, Yanmin" , Paul Mackerras , "David S. Miller" , lkml In-Reply-To: <1271922655.30535.106.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> References: <1271922655.30535.106.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 10:29:57 +0200 Message-ID: <1271924997.1776.319.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 15:50 +0800, Lin Ming wrote: > This patch series is to remove hw_perf_group_sched_in() first. > > patch 1: core, add group scheduling transactional APIs > patch 2: x86, implement group scheduling transactional APIs > patch 3: powerpc, implement group scheduling transactional APIs > patch 4: sparc, implement group scheduling transactional APIs > > Thanks for any comment. Don't RISC architectures deal better with word sized variables than with u8? I thought it curious you used u8 for the flags thing instead of int or long, but I'm not quite sure it really matters one way or the other.