[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110121171133.GI2832@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:11:33 +0100
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Pekka Enbeerg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: x86: A fast way to check capabilities of the current cpu
Hello, Christoph.
I was trying to forward this to x86 tree but spotted a problem.
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 02:07:39PM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> +static __always_inline int this_cpu_constant_test_bit(unsigned int nr,
> + const unsigned long __percpu *addr)
> +{
> + unsigned long __percpu *a = (unsigned long *)addr + nr / BITS_PER_LONG;
> +
> + return ((1UL << (nr % BITS_PER_LONG)) & percpu_read_stable(*a)) != 0;
> +}
I don't think percpu_read_stable() can be used here. It's not
guaranteed to be stable across different cpus.
Also, can we just implement what's necessary on top of this_cpu_has()?
this_cpu_has() already has constant handling, so there's no need to
add this_cpu_test_bit() at this point.
Thank you.
--
tejun
--
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