[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0910161223010.11490@gentwo.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:23:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"rusty@...tcorp.com.au" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"cebbert@...hat.com" <cebbert@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/16] percpu: remove per_cpu__ prefix.
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Tejun Heo wrote:
> __ia64_per_cpu_var() is slightly different from this_cpu_read() in
> that the former only works for percpu variables which fall on the
> first percpu page - ie. static percpu vars in the kernel image. So,
> __ia64_per_cpu_var() is a bit more efficient than this_cpu_read() as
> it doesn't have to compute the address.
>
> So, what we can do is to leave the macro alone for now and then add
> sparse annotation to it later in the patch as it's basically another
> specialized accessor. How does that sound?
Ok. The macro would be arch specific anyways.
--
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