[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090312003709.1196ce15.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:37:09 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PULL] Wrapper macros for struct task_struct and struct
mm_struct cpumask transition
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:45:22 +1030 Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> wrote:
> On Thursday 12 March 2009 14:50:11 Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Thursday 12 March 2009 15:06:52 Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > Rusty Russell (2):
> > > cpumask: tsk_cpumask for accessing the struct task_struct's cpus_allowed.
> > > cpumask: mm_cpumask for accessing the struct mm_struct's cpu_vm_mask.
> > >
> > > include/linux/mm_types.h | 3 +++
> > > include/linux/sched.h | 3 +++
Please prefer to put the patches in the email if practical? More
eyeballs and all that.
<goes fishing in linux-next>
: commit ccbc7af2a675bce8a9d4d3ab8e9c8a71a39d9158
: Author: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
: AuthorDate: Tue Mar 10 10:03:44 2009 +1100
: Commit: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
: CommitDate: Tue Mar 10 10:03:44 2009 +1100
:
: cpumask:task_cpumask
:
: This allows us to change the representation (to a dangling bitmap)
: without breaking all the callers: they can use tsk_cpumask() now and
: won't see a difference as the changes roll into linux-next.
:
: Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
:
: diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
: index 8c216e0..011db2f 100644
: --- a/include/linux/sched.h
: +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
: @@ -1419,6 +1419,9 @@ struct task_struct {
: #endif
: };
:
: +/* Future-safe accessor for struct task_struct's cpus_allowed. */
: +#define tsk_cpumask(tsk) (&(tsk)->cpus_allowed)
: +
: /*
: * Priority of a process goes from 0..MAX_PRIO-1, valid RT
: * priority is 0..MAX_RT_PRIO-1, and SCHED_NORMAL/SCHED_BATCH
:
:
:
: commit 614e0176340928efb92cba676126048fdd466f0f
: Author: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
: AuthorDate: Tue Mar 10 10:03:44 2009 +1100
: Commit: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
: CommitDate: Tue Mar 10 10:03:44 2009 +1100
:
: cpumask:mm_cpumask
:
: This allows us to change the representation (to a dangling bitmap)
: without breaking all the callers: they can use mm_cpumask() now and
: won't see a difference as the changes roll into linux-next.
:
: Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
:
: diff --git a/include/linux/mm_types.h b/include/linux/mm_types.h
: index 92915e8..d84feb7 100644
: --- a/include/linux/mm_types.h
: +++ b/include/linux/mm_types.h
: @@ -276,4 +276,7 @@ struct mm_struct {
: #endif
: };
:
: +/* Future-safe accessor for struct mm_struct's cpu_vm_mask. */
: +#define mm_cpumask(mm) (&(mm)->cpu_vm_mask)
: +
: #endif /* _LINUX_MM_TYPES_H */
:
It would be pretty perverse to run tsk_cpumask() against a `struct
cpuset*', but your proposed implementation would merrily permit that
mistake.
Can we write the kernel in C please??
> And if the
> wrappers are in Linus' tree, it's easy to get the conversions into linux-next.
yup, the patches are quite safe and mergeable. And if they'd been in the
email body, Linus might have seen that and pulled them ;)
--
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