Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760500AbZCXSY6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:24:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760239AbZCXSYb (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:24:31 -0400 Received: from relay3.ptmail.sapo.pt ([212.55.154.23]:60001 "HELO sapo.pt" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1759676AbZCXSY2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:24:28 -0400 X-AntiVirus: PTMail-AV 0.3-0.92.0 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:22:05 +0000 From: Luis Henriques To: Gregory Haskins Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 -tip] sched: Clean unused fields from struct rq Message-ID: <20090324182205.GA3930@hades.domain.com> References: <20090318225137.GA3766@hades.domain.com> <20090323175224.GA3938@hades.domain.com> <20090324140419.GD32043@elte.hu> <49C8FA99.9030503@novell.com> <20090324154130.GC31143@elte.hu> <49C90366.2000905@novell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49C90366.2000905@novell.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1657 Lines: 35 Hi, On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:59:34AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote: > > How about moving schedstat to Documentation/sched/schedstat.c or so? > > It's small and trivial enough, and that way changes would go hand in > > hand with the app. > > > Oh, I misunderstood. The tool patch I was referencing is for my > schedtop tool that is in a separate tree and written in C++. In > retrospect, you probably don't care about the relative state of my tool > coincident with the kernel side change, then. I agree that this other > schedstat tool should probably be in-tree and patched at the same time > as Luis' kernel patch. > > FWIW: I have no problem with schedtop.cc going into the kernel as well > if that is what you would like, but I figured I would be burned at the > stake for suggestion such heresy as C++ in the tree ;) I also agree that there will be issues adding schedtop to the kernel tree, for two reasons: 1) it is written in C++ 2) it has dependencies on external libraries (libboost). So, unless the tool is re-written, I guess it will be difficult have it accepted. But that's just me saying this :-) Now, to summarise and to check I understood everything correctly: I need to resend my patch (the kernel patch), adding a reference to the URL where schedtop can be obtained. Is this correct? Shall I use the URL to the git repository or to the rt wiki? Or both? -- Luis Henriques -- 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/