From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751649Ab3BPDou (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2013 22:44:50 -0500 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.65]:3648 "EHLO szxga02-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750909Ab3BPDos (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2013 22:44:48 -0500 Message-ID: <511EFFA5.6000306@huawei.com> Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 11:40:21 +0800 From: Li Zefan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Namhyung Kim , Clark Williams , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] scheduler include file reorganization References: <20130207094650.76302f47@riff.lan> <20130207185608.GA25223@gmail.com> <20130207191345.GA28960@gmail.com> <20130207195257.GA29985@gmail.com> <20130207150838.02226207@riff.lan> <20130208141841.GB30334@gmail.com> <20130208085828.02e61518@riff.lan> <20130211095457.GF23932@gmail.com> <87d2w5ovc0.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> <20130213091512.GC7630@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20130213091512.GC7630@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.135.68.215] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2013/2/13 17:15, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Namhyung Kim wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:54:58 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> * Clark Williams 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.