On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 06:31:15PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > Removing this kthread won't measurably move us farther away from that > goal either. > > It's currently under CONFIG_CIFS_EXPERIMENTAL, which would be fine if > it actually did something. It doesn't though -- it just wakes up tasks > that don't need to be woken up. > > I have no issue with a kthread that does useful work, but why not remove > this kthread out of the mainline code for now and just plan to put it > back when it actually has something useful to do? > > The patch that removes it will live in perpetuity in git. It'll be a > trivial matter to revert it when you're ready to have the kthread do > real work. Yeah. Currently it's useless code. If a proper *notify implementation for cifs still needs a thread it can be added with that implementation, and I'm sure it'll look very different from the current one (at least after review..) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
