Re: [PATCH 6/6] sched, wait: Make the __wait_event*() interface morefriendly

[Ingo Molnar]

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Change all __wait_event*() implementations to match the corresponding
> wait_event*() signature for convenience.
> 
> In particular this does away with the weird 'ret' logic. Since there
> are __wait_event*() users this requires we update them too.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/mips/kernel/rtlx.c         |   19 +++---
>  include/linux/tty.h             |   10 +--
>  include/linux/wait.h            |  113 +++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>  net/irda/af_irda.c              |    5 -
>  net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_sync.c |    7 --
>  5 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)

Since now everyone seems to agree about this series, and since this 
particular patch changes generated code it would be really nice to split 
it into about ten per interface patches:

  - __wait_event_interruptible()
  - __wait_event_interruptible_timeout()
  - __wait_event_interruptible_exclusive()
  - __wait_event_interruptible_lock_irq()
  - __wait_event_interruptible_tty()
  - __wait_event()
  - __wait_event_timeout()
  - __wait_event_killable()
  - __wait_event_interruptible_lock_irq_timeout()

The changes seem to be mostly isolated, they are even in separate patch 
hunks most of the time making a splitup relatively easy - with a handful 
of semantic interdependencies.

There's very little downside to doing it the split-up way, and there's a 
lot of bisection and bug review upside, should any of these changes prove 
problematic...

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/