[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXHKn+RLQf1Nc_7Vs1qVoFZd6RL4=WX8AwoLst18i7n+LA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 18:10:33 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Keith Packard <keithpac@...zon.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/8] sched: move CPU field back into thread_info if THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK=y
On Tue, 14 Sept 2021 at 17:59, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 8:53 AM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > task_cpu() takes a 'const struct task_struct *', whereas
> > task_thread_info() takes a 'struct task_struct *'.
>
> Oh, annoying, but that's easily fixed. Just make that
>
> static inline struct thread_info *task_thread_info(struct
> task_struct *task) ..
>
> be a simple
>
> #define task_thread_info(tsk) (&(tsk)->thread_info)
>
> instead. That actually then matches the !THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK case anyway.
>
> Make the commit comment be about how that fixes the type problem.
>
> Because while in many cases inline functions are superior to macros,
> it clearly isn't the case in this case.
>
Works for me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists