On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 08:57:20PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 08:25:41PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 08:57:37AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 05:07:31PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > There are two adjacent sysctl entries protected by the same > > > > CONFIG_TREE_RCU config symbol. Merge them into a single block to > > > > improve readability. > > > > > > > > Use the more common "#ifdef" form while at it. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > If you would like me to take this, please let me know. (The default > > > would be not the upcoming merge window, but the one after that.) > > > > > > If you would rather send it via some other path: > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The one that that occurs to me is that while at it, Geert, > > can you also just then follow up with a patch 2/2 which then > > moves the sysctl out to the respective RCU code. If you look > > at linux-nxt kernel/sysctl.c is getting modified heavily with > > time to avoid stuffing everyone's sysctls there because this > > creates merge conflicts, make the file hard to read, and we > > have ways to split this. > > > > This work started about 2 kernel releases ago and is ongoing, > > it may take 3-4 more before kernel/sysctl.c stop being a kitchen > > sink of everyone's syctls. > > > > Paul, I've been collecting these modifications in a sysctl-next > > tree to avoid merge conflicts, and I try to not do to much per > > kernel release. If you like I can take this in for that tree > > as well, but as you noted, this would be for the next release, > > not the current one which we'll soon enter the merge window for. > > > > Let me know! > > Please do take it! Geert, I queued this up onto sysctl-next, but would hope you *might* be inclined to move the sysctls out as outlined above to help with the kitchen sink on kernel/sysctl.c. Luis
