From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753904Ab3LSP1H (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:27:07 -0500 Received: from mail-qc0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:42888 "EHLO mail-qc0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753724Ab3LSP1F (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:27:05 -0500 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:27:01 -0500 From: Tejun Heo To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Kent Overstreet , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Oleg Nesterov , Arjan van de Ven , Dan Williams Subject: Re: [PATCH] closures: move to lib/ Message-ID: <20131219152701.GC16994@htj.dyndns.org> References: <1387416594-23930-1-git-send-email-kmo@daterainc.com> <20131219120516.GA26089@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131219120516.GA26089@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 04:05:16AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 05:29:54PM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > the closure code was never intended to be bcache specific - hopefully it can be > > useful elsewhere in the kernel. > > They are not. They aren't closures in the CS sense, and they are an > ugly mess. Please work on removing them instead. I pretty much agree with Christoph here. Compared to all other generic utilities we have, the proposed mechanism is giant in its conceptual complexity. This is a lot worse than semaphores. I personally think inclusion of it in the upstream kernel at all was a bad idea. Nacked-by: Tejun Heo Thanks. -- tejun