[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1330698048.25686.246.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 09:20:48 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Carsten Emde <C.Emde@...dl.org>,
John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Clark Williams <clark.williams@...il.com>,
"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"rusty@...tcorp.com.au" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT 3/9][RFC] [PATCH 3/9] lglock/rt: Use non-rt
for_each_cpu() in -rt code
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 12:55 +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 03/02/2012 12:25 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> } \
> > + register_hotcpu_notifier(&name##_lg_cpu_notifier); \
> > + get_online_cpus(); \
> > + for_each_online_cpu(i) \
> > + cpu_set(i, name##_cpus); \
>
>
> This can be further improved. We don't really need this loop. We can replace
> it with:
>
> cpumask_copy(&name##_cpus, cpu_online_mask);
>
> (as pointed out by Ingo. See: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/29/93 and
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/29/153).
>
> I will try sending a patch for this to non-RT after the numerous patches
> currently flying around this code (in non-RT) settle down..
>
>
Yeah, I thought that was funny too, but I wanted RT to be close to
mainline. My thoughts were to fix the broken hotplug code at the time
and I wasn't thinking too much on improving mainline ;-)
-- Steve
--
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