[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1339102584.28766.94.camel@sbsiddha-desk.sc.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 13:56:23 -0700
From: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
joerg.roedel@....com, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] irq: use config_enabled(SMP) checks to cleanup
irq_set_affinity() for UP
On Thu, 2012-06-07 at 13:36 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> can you just use
> >> if (nr_cpu_ids > 1)
> >> checking instead
> >> if config_enabled(CONFIG_SMP)
> >
> > Idea is to not have any extra runtime checks if CONFIG_SMP is enabled
> > and which is when all the smp affinity routines are used/invoked.
>
> then could use
> if (NR_CPUS > 1)
What is the problem with using config_enabled(CONFIG_SMP)? People
looking for "CONFIG_SMP" can easily identify the dependency.
thanks,
suresh
--
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