Re: [PATCH] SCHED: remove proliferation of wait_on_bit action functions.

[NeilBrown]

On Thu, 22 May 2014 11:05:02 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> * NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > [[ get_maintainer.pl suggested 61 email address for this patch.
> >    I've trimmed that list somewhat.  Hope I didn't miss anyone
> >    important...
> >    I'm hoping it will go in through the scheduler tree, but would
> >    particularly like an Acked-by for the fscache parts.  Other acks
> >    welcome.
> > ]]
> > 
> > The current "wait_on_bit" interface requires an 'action' function
> > to be provided which does the actual waiting.
> > There are over 20 such functions, many of them identical.
> > Most cases can be satisfied by one of just two functions, one
> > which uses io_schedule() and one which just uses schedule().
> > 
> > So:
> >  Rename wait_on_bit and        wait_on_bit_lock to
> >         wait_on_bit_action and wait_on_bit_lock_action
> >  to make it explicit that they need an action function.
> > 
> >  Introduce new wait_on_bit{,_lock} and wait_on_bit{,_lock}_io
> >  which are *not* given an action function but implicitly use
> >  a standard one.
> >  The decision to error-out if a signal is pending is now made
> >  based on the 'mode' argument rather than being encoded in the action
> >  function.
> 
> this patch fails to build on x86-32 allyesconfigs.

Could you share the build errors?

> 
> Could we keep the old names for a while, and remove them in the next 
> cycle or so?

I don't see how changing the names later rather than now will reduce the
chance of errors... maybe I'm missing something.

Thanks,
NeilBrown



> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature