[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200809130803.00563.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 08:02:59 +1000
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
davej@...emonkey.org.uk, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] CPUMASK: proposal for replacing cpumask_t
On Saturday 13 September 2008 00:28:56 Mike Travis wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> > I'm yet to be convinced that we really need to allocate cpumasks in any
> > fast paths. And if not, we should simply allocate them everywhere. I'd
> > rather see one #ifdef around a place where we can show a perf issue.
>
> Using a typedef came from Linus, and the idea is basically if NR_CPUS fits
> into a long, then it's carried as an array of one (ie., local variable).
Sure it's clever. ie. nice and confusing.
But do we have any code paths where we care? Unless we do, let's just keep it
simple...
Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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