Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-09 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:52:01AM +, Jan Beulich wrote: > Yes. And the unidentified feature is NLKD. But as with other notifiers (most > notably the module unload one), all reasonable kernel debuggers should > need them (or do explicit patching of the mentioned source files). As I > explained

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-09 Thread Jan Beulich
>> Am I to conclude then that there's no point in addressing the issues other >> people pointed out? While I (obviously, since I submitted the patch >> disagree), >> I'm not certain how others feel. My main point for disagreement here is (I'm >> sorry to repeat this) that as long as certain code i

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-08 Thread Matthew Helsley
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 18:24 -0800, Matt Helsley wrote: > On Sun, 2007-12-23 at 12:26 +, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > > > in task handling functions, it seem

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-08 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:47:00 -0800 Matt Helsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > ... > > > Am I to conclude then that there's no point in addressing the issues other > > > people pointed out? While I (obviously, since I submitted the patch > > > disagree), > > > I'm not certain how others feel

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-08 Thread Matt Helsley
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 14:14 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:38:03 + > "Jan Beulich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>> Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 25.12.07 23:05 >>> > > >On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:26:21 + Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >wrote: > > > >

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-08 Thread Matt Helsley
On Sun, 2007-12-23 at 12:26 +, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +, Jan Beulich wrote: > > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that > > these components can use

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-08 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:03:09 -0600 Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew wrote: > > What are those (unidentified) add-on features doing at present? > > Patching calls into fork.c/exec.c/exit.c? > > Most likely. I suspect we have general agreement and awareness > that such patching is n

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-08 Thread Paul Jackson
Andrew wrote: > What are those (unidentified) add-on features doing at present? > Patching calls into fork.c/exec.c/exit.c? Most likely. I suspect we have general agreement and awareness that such patching is not something that sells well in Linux-land. And for good reason in my personal view ...

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-08 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:38:03 + "Jan Beulich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 25.12.07 23:05 >>> > >On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:26:21 + Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2008-01-08 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 25.12.07 23:05 >>> >On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:26:21 + Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +, Jan Beulich wrote: >> > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint >> > in task handlin

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2007-12-25 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:26:21 + Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +, Jan Beulich wrote: > > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that > > the

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2007-12-23 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +, Jan Beulich wrote: > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that > these components can use instead of having them all patch themselves > directly into core fi

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2007-12-20 Thread Jan Beulich
>Yes, but why export variables? Wouldn't it be better to export >an API? > >That simplifies the callers (they all pass "current" as task >and "task_notifier_list" as arguments). > >It also prevents exposing internal variables (notifier lists >ARE internal variables) to modules. > >What do you t

Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier

2007-12-20 Thread Ingo Oeser
Hi Jan, I like and support your idea! On Thursday 20 December 2007, Jan Beulich wrote: > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that > these components can use instead of having them all patch themse