Hello, Peter, Ingo. 11/26/2009 09:40 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > CALLBACK_EVENT() would be my preferred name, and shouldn't live anywhere > near the regular tracing bits, the tracing bits could simply add another > callback in it when enabled. I haven't looked at the mm code but if the scheduler callback requirement isn't gonna explode big time soon and we know which functions are the candidate callbacks at build time, I think this can be done pretty efficiently with an ulong enable mask per task and fixed function dispatch such that no callback case just goes through one likely() conditional test at the tracing point and callback cases are dispatched using conditional direct jump. The thing is that I've been sitting on these workqueue patches for months now and I really want them in stable tree at this point. So, how about putting the current simplistic notifier code into a sched/ branch which is not pushed to Linus and then after pushing the workqueue patches, I'll work on the notifiers branch before pushing the whole thing to Linus. Although the scheduler notifier changes necessary for c-m-workqueue adds more notifiers, it's just extension of an existing facility and pretty isolated change from other workqueue changes. How does that sound? Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
