[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181010055026.GA17688@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 07:50:26 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
jgross@...e.com, chao.p.peng@...el.com, chao.gao@...el.com,
isaku.yamahata@...el.com, michael.h.kelley@...rosoft.com,
tianyu.lan@...rosoft.com, "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] locking/pvqspinlock, hv: Enable PV qspinlock for
Hyper-V
* Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 18-10-09 12:54:27, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Follow PV spinlock mechanism to implement the callback functions
> > > to allow the CPU idling and kicking operations on Hyper-V.
> >
> > > +#if defined(CONFIG_SMP)
> > > + smp_ops.smp_prepare_boot_cpu = hv_smp_prepare_boot_cpu;
> > > +#endif
> >
> > What's wrong with using the common pattern of:
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >
> > ?
>
> There is no difference between "#ifdef" and "#if defined". I just copied
> it from "hv_smp_prepare_boot_cpu()". Do you need me submit a fix patch
> after this set is merged?
It's equivalent code, my point was that '#ifdef CONFIG_XYZ' is the shorter, more canonical
pattern we use in the kernel most of the time, it's shorter, easier to read. We only use
defined() for longer preprocessor directive conditions, and it's a pattern for "there's
something more complex here than a simple CONFIG_XYZ dependency".
Anyway, Thomas fixed it up in the latest iteration.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists