* [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
@ 2013-02-07 15:46 Clark Williams
2013-02-07 18:56 ` Ingo Molnar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Clark Williams @ 2013-02-07 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar, LKML
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2045 bytes --]
Ingo,
Is this more in line with what you wanted?
I moved the sysctl bits out into include/linux/sched/sysctl.h, then
updated any source dependent on sysctl bits, then added my SCHED_RR
tuning knob, then finally created include/linux/sched/rt.h to hold
most of the rt scheduler specific bits.
Clark Williams (3):
sched: move sched.h sysctl bits into separate header
sched/rt: add a tuning knob to allow changing SCHED_RR timeslice
sched/rt: move rt specific bits into new header file
block/blk-exec.c | 1 +
drivers/spi/spi.c | 2 +-
drivers/staging/csr/bh.c | 2 +-
drivers/staging/csr/unifi_sme.c | 2 +-
drivers/tty/sysrq.c | 1 +
fs/select.c | 1 +
include/linux/sched.h | 144 +-------------------------------------
include/linux/sched/rt.h | 58 +++++++++++++++
include/linux/sched/sysctl.h | 110 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
init/init_task.c | 2 +
kernel/futex.c | 1 +
kernel/hrtimer.c | 2 +
kernel/irq/manage.c | 1 +
kernel/rtmutex-debug.c | 1 +
kernel/rtmutex-tester.c | 1 +
kernel/rtmutex.c | 1 +
kernel/sched/core.c | 19 +++++
kernel/sched/cpupri.c | 2 +
kernel/sched/rt.c | 6 +-
kernel/sched/sched.h | 2 +
kernel/sysctl.c | 8 +++
kernel/timer.c | 1 +
kernel/trace/trace.c | 1 +
kernel/trace/trace_sched_wakeup.c | 2 +-
kernel/watchdog.c | 1 +
mm/mmap.c | 1 +
mm/mremap.c | 1 +
mm/page-writeback.c | 1 +
mm/page_alloc.c | 1 +
29 files changed, 227 insertions(+), 149 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 include/linux/sched/rt.h
create mode 100644 include/linux/sched/sysctl.h
--
1.8.1
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-07 15:46 [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization Clark Williams
@ 2013-02-07 18:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-07 19:13 ` Ingo Molnar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2013-02-07 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Clark Williams
Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar, LKML
* Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Ingo,
>
> Is this more in line with what you wanted?
>
> I moved the sysctl bits out into include/linux/sched/sysctl.h, then
> updated any source dependent on sysctl bits, then added my SCHED_RR
> tuning knob, then finally created include/linux/sched/rt.h to hold
> most of the rt scheduler specific bits.
>
> Clark Williams (3):
> sched: move sched.h sysctl bits into separate header
> sched/rt: add a tuning knob to allow changing SCHED_RR timeslice
> sched/rt: move rt specific bits into new header file
>
> block/blk-exec.c | 1 +
> drivers/spi/spi.c | 2 +-
> drivers/staging/csr/bh.c | 2 +-
> drivers/staging/csr/unifi_sme.c | 2 +-
> drivers/tty/sysrq.c | 1 +
> fs/select.c | 1 +
> include/linux/sched.h | 144 +-------------------------------------
> include/linux/sched/rt.h | 58 +++++++++++++++
> include/linux/sched/sysctl.h | 110 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> init/init_task.c | 2 +
> kernel/futex.c | 1 +
> kernel/hrtimer.c | 2 +
> kernel/irq/manage.c | 1 +
> kernel/rtmutex-debug.c | 1 +
> kernel/rtmutex-tester.c | 1 +
> kernel/rtmutex.c | 1 +
> kernel/sched/core.c | 19 +++++
> kernel/sched/cpupri.c | 2 +
> kernel/sched/rt.c | 6 +-
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 2 +
> kernel/sysctl.c | 8 +++
> kernel/timer.c | 1 +
> kernel/trace/trace.c | 1 +
> kernel/trace/trace_sched_wakeup.c | 2 +-
> kernel/watchdog.c | 1 +
> mm/mmap.c | 1 +
> mm/mremap.c | 1 +
> mm/page-writeback.c | 1 +
> mm/page_alloc.c | 1 +
> 29 files changed, 227 insertions(+), 149 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 include/linux/sched/rt.h
> create mode 100644 include/linux/sched/sysctl.h
Yeah, that looks pretty good.
I'll give it some testing.
Thanks,
Ingo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-07 18:56 ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2013-02-07 19:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-07 19:52 ` Ingo Molnar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2013-02-07 19:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Clark Williams
Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar, LKML
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> Yeah, that looks pretty good.
>
> I'll give it some testing.
Found one build error so far, applied the fix below.
Thanks,
Ingo
---
kernel/mutex.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
Index: linux/kernel/mutex.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/mutex.c
+++ linux/kernel/mutex.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
*/
#include <linux/mutex.h>
#include <linux/sched.h>
+#include <linux/sched/rt.h>
#include <linux/export.h>
#include <linux/spinlock.h>
#include <linux/interrupt.h>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-07 19:13 ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2013-02-07 19:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-07 21:08 ` Clark Williams
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2013-02-07 19:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Clark Williams
Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar, LKML
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, that looks pretty good.
> >
> > I'll give it some testing.
>
> Found one build error so far, applied the fix below.
Another one was in NOMMU mode (fixed below) - a hidden sched.h
include file dependency in mm/nommu.c.
It's looking good otherwise!
Thanks,
Ingo
--------->
diff --git a/mm/nommu.c b/mm/nommu.c
index 79c3cac..b20db4e 100644
--- a/mm/nommu.c
+++ b/mm/nommu.c
@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
#include <linux/security.h>
#include <linux/syscalls.h>
#include <linux/audit.h>
+#include <linux/sched/sysctl.h>
#include <asm/uaccess.h>
#include <asm/tlb.h>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-07 19:52 ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2013-02-07 21:08 ` Clark Williams
2013-02-08 14:18 ` Ingo Molnar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Clark Williams @ 2013-02-07 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar, LKML
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 702 bytes --]
On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 20:52:57 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah, that looks pretty good.
> > >
> > > I'll give it some testing.
> >
> > Found one build error so far, applied the fix below.
>
> Another one was in NOMMU mode (fixed below) - a hidden sched.h
> include file dependency in mm/nommu.c.
>
> It's looking good otherwise!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
>
Huh, I did a build with an allmodconfig config file. You must be doing
some odd permutations.
I have both of your fixes applied, send me any more you find and I'll
regenerate.
Clark
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-07 21:08 ` Clark Williams
@ 2013-02-08 14:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-08 14:58 ` Clark Williams
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2013-02-08 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Clark Williams
Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar, LKML
* Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 20:52:57 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yeah, that looks pretty good.
> > > >
> > > > I'll give it some testing.
> > >
> > > Found one build error so far, applied the fix below.
> >
> > Another one was in NOMMU mode (fixed below) - a hidden sched.h
> > include file dependency in mm/nommu.c.
> >
> > It's looking good otherwise!
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ingo
> >
>
> Huh, I did a build with an allmodconfig config file. You must
> be doing some odd permutations.
Yeah, randconfig coverage and cross-arch build coverage. One of
the build errors triggered on allnoconfig, the other on the
blackfin architecture.
> I have both of your fixes applied, send me any more you find
> and I'll regenerate.
No need, I fixed your series locally and pushed out the result.
Wanna split out some other parts of sched.h? ;-) I can do the
build coverage testing part for those as well.
Thanks,
Ingo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-08 14:18 ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2013-02-08 14:58 ` Clark Williams
2013-02-11 9:54 ` Ingo Molnar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Clark Williams @ 2013-02-08 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar, LKML
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1552 bytes --]
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013 15:18:41 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 20:52:57 +0100
> > Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Yeah, that looks pretty good.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll give it some testing.
> > > >
> > > > Found one build error so far, applied the fix below.
> > >
> > > Another one was in NOMMU mode (fixed below) - a hidden sched.h
> > > include file dependency in mm/nommu.c.
> > >
> > > It's looking good otherwise!
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Ingo
> > >
> >
> > Huh, I did a build with an allmodconfig config file. You must
> > be doing some odd permutations.
>
> Yeah, randconfig coverage and cross-arch build coverage. One of
> the build errors triggered on allnoconfig, the other on the
> blackfin architecture.
>
> > I have both of your fixes applied, send me any more you find
> > and I'll regenerate.
>
> No need, I fixed your series locally and pushed out the result.
>
> Wanna split out some other parts of sched.h? ;-) I can do the
> build coverage testing part for those as well.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
I figured that was coming. :)
I'll look at it again and see about pulling the autogroup/cgroup stuff
into it's own header. After that it's probably going to require some
serious changes.
Any suggestions?
Clark
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-08 14:58 ` Clark Williams
@ 2013-02-11 9:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-13 1:29 ` Namhyung Kim
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2013-02-11 9:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Clark Williams
Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar, LKML
* Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> wrote:
> I figured that was coming. :)
;-)
> I'll look at it again and see about pulling the
> autogroup/cgroup stuff into it's own header. After that it's
> probably going to require some serious changes.
>
> Any suggestions?
I'd suggest doing it as finegrained as possible - potentially
one concept at a time. I wouldn't mind a dozen small files in
include/linux/sched/ - possibly more.
In the end sched.h would include core wakeup/sleep methods that
tons of drivers rely on, and it would include the 'struct
task_struct' data type definition (and all its prereqs), which
we rely on in tons of drivers as well.
Not much else should remain in sched.h - in theory :-)
In terms of build coverage: just build an x86 defconfig with
perhaps the specific sub-feature (such as autogroups/cgroups)
turned off/on - I'd suggest for you to not even do allmodconfig
testing (which is really slow unless you have a cluster of build
machines), I can test all that and more and fix the fallout
before applying it.
Thanks,
Ingo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-11 9:54 ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2013-02-13 1:29 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-02-13 9:15 ` Ingo Molnar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Namhyung Kim @ 2013-02-13 1:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Clark Williams, Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt,
Ingo Molnar, LKML
Hi,
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:54:58 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> I figured that was coming. :)
>
> ;-)
>
>> I'll look at it again and see about pulling the
>> autogroup/cgroup stuff into it's own header. After that it's
>> probably going to require some serious changes.
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>
> I'd suggest doing it as finegrained as possible - potentially
> one concept at a time. I wouldn't mind a dozen small files in
> include/linux/sched/ - possibly more.
What about the .c files? AFAICS the sched/core.c and sched/fair.c are
rather huge and contain various concepts which might be separated to
their own files. It'd be better reorganizing them too IMHO.
Thanks,
Namhyung
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-13 1:29 ` Namhyung Kim
@ 2013-02-13 9:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-13 15:19 ` Clark Williams
2013-02-16 3:40 ` Li Zefan
0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2013-02-13 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Namhyung Kim
Cc: Clark Williams, Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt,
Ingo Molnar, LKML
* Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:54:58 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I figured that was coming. :)
> >
> > ;-)
> >
> >> I'll look at it again and see about pulling the
> >> autogroup/cgroup stuff into it's own header. After that it's
> >> probably going to require some serious changes.
> >>
> >> Any suggestions?
> >
> > I'd suggest doing it as finegrained as possible - potentially
> > one concept at a time. I wouldn't mind a dozen small files in
> > include/linux/sched/ - possibly more.
>
> What about the .c files? AFAICS the sched/core.c and
> sched/fair.c are rather huge and contain various concepts
> which might be separated to their own files. It'd be better
> reorganizing them too IMHO.
I'd be more careful about those, because there's various
scheduler patch-sets floating modifying them.
sched.h is much more static and it is the one that actually gets
included in like 60% of all *other* .c files, adding a few
thousand lines to every .o compilation and causing measurable
compile time overhead ...
So sched.h splitting is something we should really do, if
there's people interested in and capable of pulling it off.
Thanks,
Ingo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-13 9:15 ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2013-02-13 15:19 ` Clark Williams
2013-02-14 7:59 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-02-16 3:40 ` Li Zefan
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Clark Williams @ 2013-02-13 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Namhyung Kim, Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt,
Ingo Molnar, LKML
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1641 bytes --]
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:15:12 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:54:58 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I figured that was coming. :)
> > >
> > > ;-)
> > >
> > >> I'll look at it again and see about pulling the
> > >> autogroup/cgroup stuff into it's own header. After that it's
> > >> probably going to require some serious changes.
> > >>
> > >> Any suggestions?
> > >
> > > I'd suggest doing it as finegrained as possible - potentially
> > > one concept at a time. I wouldn't mind a dozen small files in
> > > include/linux/sched/ - possibly more.
> >
> > What about the .c files? AFAICS the sched/core.c and
> > sched/fair.c are rather huge and contain various concepts
> > which might be separated to their own files. It'd be better
> > reorganizing them too IMHO.
>
> I'd be more careful about those, because there's various
> scheduler patch-sets floating modifying them.
>
> sched.h is much more static and it is the one that actually gets
> included in like 60% of all *other* .c files, adding a few
> thousand lines to every .o compilation and causing measurable
> compile time overhead ...
>
> So sched.h splitting is something we should really do, if
> there's people interested in and capable of pulling it off.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
And since I'm one of the people that care about the RT patch (which
modifies the scheduler files) I'll just start with baby steps and reorg
the headers.
Clark
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-13 15:19 ` Clark Williams
@ 2013-02-14 7:59 ` Namhyung Kim
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Namhyung Kim @ 2013-02-14 7:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Clark Williams
Cc: Ingo Molnar, Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner, Steven Rostedt,
Ingo Molnar, LKML
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:19:37 -0600, Clark Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:15:12 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>> * Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:54:58 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> > > * Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I figured that was coming. :)
>> > >
>> > > ;-)
>> > >
>> > >> I'll look at it again and see about pulling the
>> > >> autogroup/cgroup stuff into it's own header. After that it's
>> > >> probably going to require some serious changes.
>> > >>
>> > >> Any suggestions?
>> > >
>> > > I'd suggest doing it as finegrained as possible - potentially
>> > > one concept at a time. I wouldn't mind a dozen small files in
>> > > include/linux/sched/ - possibly more.
>> >
>> > What about the .c files? AFAICS the sched/core.c and
>> > sched/fair.c are rather huge and contain various concepts
>> > which might be separated to their own files. It'd be better
>> > reorganizing them too IMHO.
>>
>> I'd be more careful about those, because there's various
>> scheduler patch-sets floating modifying them.
>>
>> sched.h is much more static and it is the one that actually gets
>> included in like 60% of all *other* .c files, adding a few
>> thousand lines to every .o compilation and causing measurable
>> compile time overhead ...
>>
>> So sched.h splitting is something we should really do, if
>> there's people interested in and capable of pulling it off.
>
> And since I'm one of the people that care about the RT patch (which
> modifies the scheduler files) I'll just start with baby steps and reorg
> the headers.
Understood. Thanks for the explanation!
Thanks,
Namhyung
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization
2013-02-13 9:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-13 15:19 ` Clark Williams
@ 2013-02-16 3:40 ` Li Zefan
1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Li Zefan @ 2013-02-16 3:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Namhyung Kim, Clark Williams, Peter Zijlstra, Thomas Gleixner,
Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar, LKML
On 2013/2/13 17:15, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:54:58 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> * Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I figured that was coming. :)
>>>
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>>> I'll look at it again and see about pulling the
>>>> autogroup/cgroup stuff into it's own header. After that it's
>>>> probably going to require some serious changes.
>>>>
>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>
>>> I'd suggest doing it as finegrained as possible - potentially
>>> one concept at a time. I wouldn't mind a dozen small files in
>>> include/linux/sched/ - possibly more.
>>
>> What about the .c files? AFAICS the sched/core.c and
>> sched/fair.c are rather huge and contain various concepts
>> which might be separated to their own files. It'd be better
>> reorganizing them too IMHO.
>
> I'd be more careful about those, because there's various
> scheduler patch-sets floating modifying them.
>
> sched.h is much more static and it is the one that actually gets
> included in like 60% of all *other* .c files, adding a few
> thousand lines to every .o compilation and causing measurable
> compile time overhead ...
>
> So sched.h splitting is something we should really do, if
> there's people interested in and capable of pulling it off.
>
While previously working on a cgroup patchset that also touched sched.h,
I noticed some lines can be moved to kernel/sched/sched.h. I've cooked
up a patchset to do that, and it results in reduction of 200+ lines in
sched.h. I'll do some compile testing before sending it out.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-02-16 3:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-02-07 15:46 [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization Clark Williams
2013-02-07 18:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-07 19:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-07 19:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-07 21:08 ` Clark Williams
2013-02-08 14:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-08 14:58 ` Clark Williams
2013-02-11 9:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-13 1:29 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-02-13 9:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-02-13 15:19 ` Clark Williams
2013-02-14 7:59 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-02-16 3:40 ` Li Zefan
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).