(cc'ing Steven and Frederic and quoting whole body) Hello, guys.
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 06:37:12PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > On 2013/3/5 16:33, Stephane Eranian wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Li Zefan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Move struct perf_cgroup_info and perf_cgroup to kernel/perf/core.c, > >> and then we can remove include of cgroup.h. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> include/linux/perf_event.h | 18 +----------------- > >> kernel/events/core.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ > >> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h > >> index e47ee46..8737e1c 100644 > >> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h > >> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h > >> @@ -21,7 +21,6 @@ > >> */ > >> > >> #ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS > >> -# include <linux/cgroup.h> > >> # include <asm/perf_event.h> > >> # include <asm/local64.h> > >> #endif > >> @@ -299,22 +298,7 @@ struct swevent_hlist { > >> #define PERF_ATTACH_GROUP 0x02 > >> #define PERF_ATTACH_TASK 0x04 > >> > >> -#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_PERF > >> -/* > >> - * perf_cgroup_info keeps track of time_enabled for a cgroup. > >> - * This is a per-cpu dynamically allocated data structure. > >> - */ > >> -struct perf_cgroup_info { > >> - u64 time; > >> - u64 timestamp; > >> -}; > >> - > >> -struct perf_cgroup { > >> - struct cgroup_subsys_state css; > >> - struct perf_cgroup_info *info; /* timing > >> info, one per cpu */ > >> -}; > >> -#endif > >> - > >> +struct perf_cgroup; > > > > The problem is that you have struct perf_cgroup in the struct perf_event > > structure. Today, this field is not referenced outside of > > kernel/events/core.c > > But it is available outside this file. If someday the field is reference, > > your > > changes will have to do reverted. So I am wondering what is the point > > of the change right now? > > > > I touch cgroup.h quite frequently, so I'd like to reduce the compile time > caused > by cgroup.h changes, so I've made a few patches to remove cgroup.h from some > header files. > > It's better to expose as less interfaces as possible, and if someone wants to > export someting he should think about if it's the right thing to do. > > Like we often make static functions usable to external users, and also often > do the > reverse thing, this patch is nothing special. I don't care either way. Steven, Frederic, Ingo? Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/
