Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> Could we reduce the migration pain by leaving the work_struct as-is and
> defining a new, leaner one and then incrementally migrating stuff over to
> it?
That involves more work in the end for a number of reasons:
(1) The more common use (I think) is the immediate, not the delayed work
item. One of them has to change, and it'd make sense for it to be the
latter.
(2) The internals of kernel/workqueue.c all refer to work_struct. They'd all
have to change as that'd no longer be the common bit.
(3) All the work callback functions have to change anyway, and they have to
be handed the most common structure as their context - assuming the third
reduction is acceptable.
(4) All the initialisers have to change anyway as they take one fewer
argument - assuming the third reduction is acceptable.
It'd be more feasible if the inventors of C had included C++-style function
overloading and structure inheritance, but they didn't.
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
