Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752951AbXLYWHk (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Dec 2007 17:07:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752361AbXLYWGs (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Dec 2007 17:06:48 -0500 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:44453 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752711AbXLYWGr (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Dec 2007 17:06:47 -0500 Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2007 14:05:26 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jan Beulich , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, pj@sgi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Message-Id: <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1622 Lines: 38 On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:26:21 +0000 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that > > these components can use instead of having them all patch themselves > > directly into core files. > > I agree that we probably want something like this. As do some others, > so we already had a few a few attempts at similar things. The first one > is from SGI and called PAGG (http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pagg/) and also > includes allocating per-task data for it's users. Then also from SGI > there has been a simplified version called pnotify that's also available > from the website above. > > Later Matt Helsley had something called "Task Watchers" which lwn has > an article on: http://lwn.net/Articles/208117/. > > For some reason neither ever made a lot of progess (performance > problems?). > I had it in -mm, sorted out all the problems but ended up not pulling the trigger. Problem is, it adds runtime overhead purely for the convenience of kernel programmers, and I don't think that's a good tradeoff. Sprinkling direct calls into a few well-known sites won't kill us, and we've survived this long. Why not keep doing that, and save everyone a few cycles? -- 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/