[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0806101032550.17131@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:33:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
cc: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [patch 02/41] cpu alloc: The allocator
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Mike Travis wrote:
> I'm a bit confused. Why is DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED() conditioned on
> ifdef MODULE?
>
> #ifdef MODULE
> #define SHARED_ALIGNED_SECTION ".data.percpu"
> #else
> #define SHARED_ALIGNED_SECTION ".data.percpu.shared_aligned"
> #endif
>
> #define DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED(type, name) \
> __attribute__((__section__(SHARED_ALIGNED_SECTION))) \
> PER_CPU_ATTRIBUTES __typeof__(type) per_cpu__##name \
> ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp
Looks wrong to me. There can be shared objects even without modules.
--
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