On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 08:38:34PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
quoted text
> This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
> atomic_notifier_chain.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> ---
> 
> Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano <t-nagano@ah.jp.nec.com>
> 
> ---
> diff -uprN linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/include/linux/notifier.h
> linux-2.6.23-rc9/include/linux/notifier.h
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/include/linux/notifier.h	2007-10-02 12:24:52.000000000
> +0900
> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc9/include/linux/notifier.h	2007-10-03 14:48:04.288000000 +0900
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
>  #include <linux/mutex.h>
>  #include <linux/rwsem.h>
>  #include <linux/srcu.h>
> +#include <linux/kobject.h>
> 
>  /*
>   * Notifier chains are of four types:
> @@ -53,6 +54,14 @@ struct notifier_block {
>  	int priority;
>  };
> 
> +struct tunable_notifier_block {
> +	struct notifier_block *nb;
> +	struct tunable_notifier_head *head;
> +	struct dentry *dir;
> +	struct dentry *pri_dentry;
> +	struct dentry *desc_dentry;
> +};
> +

Should this be tunable_atomic_notifier_block? I think there are two kind
of lists. One where handlers have to be atomic and other one where handlers
can be blocking one. I think you are making atomic one tunable. If that's
the case it should be reflected in the naming everywhere.

Thanks
Vivek
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/