[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D924FEE.8040804@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:32:30 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] RCU: Add TASK_RCU_OFFSET
On 03/29/2011 02:31 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>
>> I have to say that if we have to use hardcoded offsets in C then we have
>> bigger problems.
>
> In this case, the offsets are mechanically generated from the structure
> definitions.
>
> Or am I missing your point?
>
Yes. The point is if we have to pull out these kinds of hacks in *C*
code, we are doing it wrong. Not just a little wrong, but completely
and totally bonkers wrong.
-hpa
--
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