[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4889205C.9080806@sgi.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:37:48 -0700
From: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Lennert Buytenhek <kernel@...tstofly.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>,
Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Tigran Aivazian <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Sam Creasey <sammy@...my.net>, Greg Banks <gnb@....com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andreas Schwab <schwab@...e.de>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cpumask: Change cpumask_of_cpu to use cpumask_of_cpu_map
Mike Travis wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
>> On Thursday 24 July 2008 03:18:42 Mike Travis wrote:
>>> Note that the declaration of cpumask_of_cpu_map[] is initialized
>>> so that cpumask_of_cpu(0) is defined early. This assumes that
>>> cpu 0 is the boot cpu.
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> Make this statically initialized please. That almost guarantees there'll
>> be no problems. It's a little tricky to do, but possible. Patch below
>> tested on 32 bit x86 only.
>
> I thought about it, but it didn't seem to be worth the effort. One problem
> though, the cpumask bits are such that the LSB of the last word is cpu 0.
> So your initializer sets it up in reverse order. I'll see if I can't
> figure out how to invert it (very tricky coding btw... ;-)
I thought since the cpumask_scnprintf prints out the bit map with the LSB
being cpu 0 that the bit layout was the same. Further examination reveals
I was wrong about that.
The updated patchset to follow shortly after a bit more testing...
Thanks,
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