[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140828130213.GD29737@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 09:02:13 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Motohiro Kosaki <Motohiro.Kosaki@...fujitsu.com>,
Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Subject: Re: percpu: Define this_cpu_cpumask_var_t_ptr
Hello,
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 07:12:21PM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> New patch:
>
> From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
> Subject: __get_cpu_var/cpumask_var_t: Resolve ambiguities v2
>
> __get_cpu_var can paper over differences in the definitions
> of cpumask_var_t and either use the address of the cpumask
> variable directly or perform a fetch of the address of the
> struct cpumask allocated elsewhere. This is important
> particularly when using per cpu cpumask_var_t declarations
> because in one case we have an offset into a per cpu area
> to handle and in the other case we need to fetch a pointer
> from the offset.
>
> This patch introduces a new macro
>
> this_cpu_cpumask_var_t_ptr()
>
> that is defined where cpumask_var_t is defined and performs
> the proper actions. All use cases where __get_cpu_var
> is used with cpumask_var_t are converted to the use
> of this_cpu_cpumask_var_t_ptr().
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Rusty, if this looks okay to you, I'll route this through
percpu/for-3.18-consistent-ops branch.
Thanks.
--
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