On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> I just want to state that tasklets served their time well. But it's time
> to give them an honorable discharge. So lets get rid of tasklets and
> given them a standing salute as they leave :-)
Well, independently of whether we actually discharge them or not, I do
tend to always like things that split independent concepts up (whether
they then end up being _implemented_ independently of each other or not is
a separate issue).
So patches 1-4 all look fine to me. In fact, 5 looks ok too.
Whether we actually then want to do 6 is another matter. I think we'd need
some measuring and discussion about that.
I'm absolutely 100% sure that we do *not* want to be in a situation where
we have two different implementations of tasklets, and just keep the
CONFIG variable and let people just choose one or the other.
So imnsho doing #6 is really something that makes sense only in a "let's
measure this and decide which implementation is actually the better one",
_not_ in the sense of merging it into the standard kernel and letting them
fight it out in the long run.
But I'd happily merge 1-4 regardless after 2.6.22 is out.
Leaving patch 6 as a "only makes sense after we actually have some numbers
about it", and patch 5 is a "could go either way" as far as I'm concerned
(ie I could merge it together with the 1-4 series, but I think it's
equally valid to just see it as a companion to 6).
Does that make sense to people?
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
