From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754044AbZK0GWF (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:22:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752907AbZK0GWE (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:22:04 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:33762 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751886AbZK0GWD (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:22:03 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 07:21:47 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Tejun Heo Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , Fr??d??ric Weisbecker , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4 tip/sched/core] sched: rename preempt_notifier to sched_notifier and always enable it Message-ID: <20091127062147.GB22149@elte.hu> References: <1259234619.4273.32.camel@twins> <20091126115605.GA15189@elte.hu> <1259239259.4273.82.camel@twins> <4B0F356B.3040206@kernel.org> <20091127045209.GA13914@elte.hu> <4B0F65DD.1090707@kernel.org> <20091127054621.GA25672@elte.hu> <4B0F6B32.4090401@kernel.org> <20091127061319.GA8620@elte.hu> <4B0F6EA9.6070105@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B0F6EA9.6070105@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Tejun Heo wrote: > 11/27/2009 03:13 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >>> My position on this is rather clear: i want no new callbacks and no > >>> changes to callbacks in the scheduler until this situation is cleaned > >>> up. Five callback sites are _way_ too much - so if you want to add > >>> callbacks or change them, please clean it up and improve it first. > >> > >> Even changes which cause no functional differences? [...] > > > > Such as enabling preempt notifiers unconditionally? That's a functional > > change - it turns a so-far optional callback into an essentially > > mandatory one. > > No, I'm not gonna do that. Just patches to reorganize code so that > unnecessary conflicts won't occur. There will be NO functional > changes. Not without the other changes - which you want to do too, right? Please send all sched.c modifications via the scheduler tree. Going via other trees is fine when there's agreement by the maintainers - but this is one of the rare cases where that's not the case. Ingo