Prev: CFQ is broken for CONFIG_BLK_CGROUP=y, CFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED=n
Next: [PATCH] - Randomize node rotor used in cpuset_mem_spread_node()
From: Frederic Weisbecker on 28 Apr 2010 08:50 On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 12:13:36PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote: > When I combined the nmi_watchdog (hardlockup) and softlockup code, I > also combined the paths the touch_watchdog and touch_nmi_watchdog took. > This may not be the best idea as pointed out by Frederic W., that the > touch_watchdog case probably should not reset the hardlockup count. > > Therefore the patch belows falls back to the previous idea of keeping > the touch_nmi_watchdog a superset of the touch_watchdog case. > > Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus(a)redhat.com> Good. But now that we have this, it doesn't make sense anymore to have the big rename touch_softlockup_watchdog() into touch_watchdog(). I know it was me who advised you to do this big rename, but that was before I realised touching the softlockup shouldn't mean touching nmi watchdog too. I'm sorry about this but this big rename doesn't make sense anymore. Can we drop touch_watchdog() and keep only the two previous APIs we had before? 1) we avoid a big patch very likely to bring conflicts everywhere 2) touch_softlockup_watchdog() is much more self-explanatory in what it does. People will have less doubts about what happens when they call this. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |