[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48246749.9000101@sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 08:01:29 -0700
From: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
To: Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, bunk@...nel.org,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"William L. Irwin" <wli@...omorphy.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: define default cpu_to_node
Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 04:02:39PM -0700, Mike Travis wrote:
>> * Some architectures have CONFIG_NUMA=y but do not define a
>> default cpu_to_node macro. This provides the default in
>> asm-generic/topology.h but it relies on the fact that
>> cpu_to_node is a defined macro (and not an inline function).
>>
> NACK.. This isn't going to work anyways, cpu_to_node() is just where the
> first build error occurs. If you do this, then parent_node() is the next
> one to blow up, node_to_cpumask() after that, etc, etc. For now I've just
> stubbed the asm-generic/topology.h definitions in to asm-sh/topology.h.
Ok, Thanks! I was looking at that but without being able to compile it,
it was just a wild swing towards the fence... ;-) And your rationale makes
sense, if an arch really has numa topology then it should define what that is.
Cheers,
Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists