[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <89cb49c0-2736-dd4c-f401-4b88c22cc11f@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 11:12:44 +0100
From: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Anton Blanchard <anton@...abs.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Increase page and bit waitqueue hash size
On 17/03/2021 08.54, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> +#if CONFIG_BASE_SMALL
> +static const unsigned int page_wait_table_bits = 4;
> static wait_queue_head_t page_wait_table[PAGE_WAIT_TABLE_SIZE] __cacheline_aligned;
>
> + if (!CONFIG_BASE_SMALL) {
> + page_wait_table = alloc_large_system_hash("page waitqueue hash",
> + sizeof(wait_queue_head_t),
> + 0,
So, how does the compiler not scream at you for assigning to an array,
even if it's inside an if (0)?
Rasmus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists