[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1601271832330.3886@nanos>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 18:34:59 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
cc: Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>, Chris Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>,
rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] getcpu_cache system call: cache CPU number
of running thread
On Wed, 27 Jan 2016, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Jan 27, 2016, at 12:22 PM, Thomas Gleixner tglx@...utronix.de wrote:
> Sounds fair. What is the recommended typing for "ptr" then ?
> uint32_t ** or uint32_t * ?
>
> It would be expected to pass a "uint32_t *" for the set
> operation, but the "get" operation requires a "uint32_t **".
Well, you can't change the types depending on the opcode, so you need to stick
with **.
> Also, I'd be tempted to put the GET/SET operation selector as
> a first parameter.
Makes sense.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists