Hello, Daniel.

On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 07:11:31PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:

On 25.08.2012 01:38, Tejun Heo wrote:

quoted

quoted

task_cls_classid() and task_netprioidx() (when built as
module) are protected by a jump label and therefore we can
simply replace the subsystem index lookup with the enum.

Can we put these in a separate patch?  ie. The first patch makes all
subsys IDs constant and then patches to simplify users.

Wouldn't this break bisection? I merged this step so that all steps
in this series are able to compile and run.

I don't see why it should but maybe I'm missing something.  If so,
please enlighten me.

quoted

quoted

+#define IS_SUBSYS_ENABLED(option) IS_MODULE(option)
+#include <linux/cgroup_subsys.h>
+#undef IS_SUBSYS_ENABLED
+

Why do we need to segregate in-kernel and modular ones at all?  What's
wrong with just defining them in one go?

I have done that but the result was a panic. There seems some code
which expects this ordering. Let me dig into this and fix it.

Yes, please.

quoted

Hmm... patch sequence looks odd to me.  If you first make all IDs
constant, you can first remove module specific ones and then later add
jump labels as separate patches.  Wouldn't that be simpler?

As said above, I tried to keep all steps usable so bisection would
work. I think your steps would lead to non working versions of the
kernel.

Hmmm... Yes, it should be bisectable but again I don't see why being
biesectable interferes with the patch ordering here.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun