Re: [patch 1/2] x86, fpu: split FPU state from task struct - v3

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 03:02:45PM -0800, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> +void __attribute__((weak)) arch_task_cache_init(void)
> +{
> +}
> +
>  void __init fork_init(unsigned long mempages)
>  {
>  #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_TASK_STRUCT_ALLOCATOR
> @@ -144,6 +148,9 @@
>  			ARCH_MIN_TASKALIGN, SLAB_PANIC | SLAB_NOTRACK, NULL);
>  #endif
>  
> +	/* do the arch specific task caches init */
> +	arch_task_cache_init();

Why can't this just be a normal initcall (with the right level)?

> +int __attribute__((weak)) arch_dup_task_struct(struct task_struct *dst,
> +					       struct task_struct *src)
> +{
> +	*dst = *src;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static struct task_struct *dup_task_struct(struct task_struct *orig)
>  {
>  	struct task_struct *tsk;
> @@ -181,15 +195,15 @@
>  		return NULL;
>  	}
>  
> -	*tsk = *orig;
> + 	err = arch_dup_task_struct(tsk, orig);
> +	if (err)
> +		goto out;
> +

You're still adding a second hook instead of re-using or re-naming
setup_thread_stack.  Did I miss a good explanation for that
or was this just an oversight?

Also this weak linkage stuff creaping in is really ugly.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/