[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48A1BCAB.2090502@qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:39:07 -0700
From: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
CC: Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuset: Rework sched domains and CPU hotplug handling
(take 4)
Paul Jackson wrote:
> Rakib wrote:
>> Ok, this is the second place. But, what about the first place ( I
>> mean in line 614).
>
> You present me with a clear choice.
>
> I could find your past patch, applying it to whatever it applied to,
> and look to see what was at line 614.
>
> Or I could ask you to restate your point, with enough code
> displayed so that I could understand your point just by reading
> your email.
>
> I choose the second choice. Thank-you.
I think Rakib is talking about this code
> /* Special case for the 99% of systems with one, full, sched domain */
> if (is_sched_load_balance(&top_cpuset)) {
> doms = kmalloc(sizeof(cpumask_t), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!doms)
> goto done;
>
> dattr = kmalloc(sizeof(struct sched_domain_attr), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (dattr) {
> *dattr = SD_ATTR_INIT;
> update_domain_attr_tree(dattr, &top_cpuset);
> }
> *doms = top_cpuset.cpus_allowed;
>
> ndoms = 1;
> goto done;
> }
Which I think is perfectly fine and clear.
There are only two matches for
/attr.*=.*alloc
We covered both of them.
Max
--
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