On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 14:38 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
> * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> 
> > > And this is something that might be fine for benchmarking, but not something
> > > we should put in.  Keeping two wildly different implementation of core
> > > functionality with very different behaviour around is quite bad.  Better
> > > kill tasklets once for all.
> > 
> > Honestly, I highly doubted that this would make it up to Linus's tree.
> 
> that's where it belongs - but it first needs the cleanups suggested by 
> Christoph.

I had the impression that he didn't want it in, but instead wanted each
driver to be changed separately.

quoted text
> 
> > My aim was to get this into -mm, [...]
> 
> that would be the first step towards getting it upstream.
> 
> > and perhaps even turn on the tasklets-as-workqueues as default.
> 
> that is a hack that shouldnt be in the patch. People can unapply/apply a 
> patch just as well as they can flip a .config switch.

So should the patch be then to not even have the tasklet_softirq there
at all?  Have the patch simply replace the tasklets with workqueues, and
if someone doesn't like that, then they can simply remove the patch?

-- Steve


-
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/