Re: [PATCH 1/2] add tunable_notifier function

Takenori Nagano <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.kernel.kexec,gmane.linux.kernel.debugging
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 08:38:34PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
>> This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
>> atomic_notifier_chain.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano <[email protected]>
>>
>> ---
>> diff -uprN linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/include/linux/notifier.h
>> linux-2.6.23-rc9/include/linux/notifier.h
>> --- linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/include/linux/notifier.h	2007-10-02 12:24:52.000000000
>> +0900
>> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc9/include/linux/notifier.h	2007-10-03 14:48:04.288000000 +0900
>> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/mutex.h>
>>  #include <linux/rwsem.h>
>>  #include <linux/srcu.h>
>> +#include <linux/kobject.h>
>>
>>  /*
>>   * Notifier chains are of four types:
>> @@ -53,6 +54,14 @@ struct notifier_block {
>>  	int priority;
>>  };
>>
>> +struct tunable_notifier_block {
>> +	struct notifier_block *nb;
>> +	struct tunable_notifier_head *head;
>> +	struct dentry *dir;
>> +	struct dentry *pri_dentry;
>> +	struct dentry *desc_dentry;
>> +};
>> +
> 
> Should this be tunable_atomic_notifier_block? I think there are two kind
> of lists. One where handlers have to be atomic and other one where handlers
> can be blocking one. I think you are making atomic one tunable. If that's
> the case it should be reflected in the naming everywhere.

Hi Vivek,

Yes, it based on atomic_notifier_list. I think your opinion is reasonable.
I'll change the name tunable_notifier to tunable_atomic_notifier.

Thanks,

Takenori Nagano <[email protected]>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.