All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org" <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:07:04 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100928000704.GB4875@ericsson.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinDkJu2MSJM6bUpWJoB2XOD4LLf6GTPBX39wteD@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 07:44:01PM -0400, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Guenter Roeck
> <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 09:02:57AM -0400, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > * Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >> >> +#endif
> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >> >> +#endif
> >> >
> >> > Hm, this tickles my uglo-meter. Is there no cleaner way, preferably one
> >> > that doesnt involve preprocessor directives?
> >>
> >> Implement cpu_sibling_mask() on UP so that the loop goes away?
> >
> > So what is the take ? Looks like Linus won't accept my patch without someone
> > else signing off on it. If the uglo-meter prevents it from being accepted,
> > I'll be happy to submit the SMP cleanup patch instead. As I mentioned
> > before, I would prefer that to go into -next.
> 
> I'd _much_ rather see cpu_sibling_mask() on UP, and just have the loop go away.
> 
> But that would be a generic change. Something like the (UNTESTED!)

Which is why I didn't do it...

> attached. It returns a NULL, since it would always be a bug to
> actually _use_ the (nonexistent) mask. And that's fine for things like
> for_each_cpu() that will then happily ignore the mask.
> 
> Ingo, does this make those randconfig things work? I think it's
> prettier than the horrible "sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_SMP around in
> random places".
> 
>                         Linus

>  include/linux/smp.h |    2 ++
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/smp.h b/include/linux/smp.h
> index cfa2d20..ad48077 100644
> --- a/include/linux/smp.h
> +++ b/include/linux/smp.h
> @@ -149,6 +149,8 @@ smp_call_function_any(const struct cpumask *mask, void (*func)(void *info),
>  	return smp_call_function_single(0, func, info, wait);
>  }
>  
> +static inline const struct cpumask *cpu_sibling_mask(int cpu) { return NULL; }
> +
>  #endif /* !SMP */
>  
That works. Every other use of cpu_sibling_mask() is either in smp code
or surrounded with #ifdef CONFIG_SMP.

Ok, I'll submit another version of the patch with the generic change after 
some more testing.

Guenter

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org" <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:07:04 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100928000704.GB4875@ericsson.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinDkJu2MSJM6bUpWJoB2XOD4LLf6GTPBX39wteD@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 07:44:01PM -0400, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Guenter Roeck
> <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 09:02:57AM -0400, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > * Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >> >> +#endif
> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >> >> +#endif
> >> >
> >> > Hm, this tickles my uglo-meter. Is there no cleaner way, preferably one
> >> > that doesnt involve preprocessor directives?
> >>
> >> Implement cpu_sibling_mask() on UP so that the loop goes away?
> >
> > So what is the take ? Looks like Linus won't accept my patch without someone
> > else signing off on it. If the uglo-meter prevents it from being accepted,
> > I'll be happy to submit the SMP cleanup patch instead. As I mentioned
> > before, I would prefer that to go into -next.
> 
> I'd _much_ rather see cpu_sibling_mask() on UP, and just have the loop go away.
> 
> But that would be a generic change. Something like the (UNTESTED!)

Which is why I didn't do it...

> attached. It returns a NULL, since it would always be a bug to
> actually _use_ the (nonexistent) mask. And that's fine for things like
> for_each_cpu() that will then happily ignore the mask.
> 
> Ingo, does this make those randconfig things work? I think it's
> prettier than the horrible "sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_SMP around in
> random places".
> 
>                         Linus

>  include/linux/smp.h |    2 ++
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/smp.h b/include/linux/smp.h
> index cfa2d20..ad48077 100644
> --- a/include/linux/smp.h
> +++ b/include/linux/smp.h
> @@ -149,6 +149,8 @@ smp_call_function_any(const struct cpumask *mask, void (*func)(void *info),
>  	return smp_call_function_single(0, func, info, wait);
>  }
>  
> +static inline const struct cpumask *cpu_sibling_mask(int cpu) { return NULL; }
> +
>  #endif /* !SMP */
>  
That works. Every other use of cpu_sibling_mask() is either in smp code
or surrounded with #ifdef CONFIG_SMP.

Ok, I'll submit another version of the patch with the generic change after 
some more testing.

Guenter

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-28  0:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-27 11:59 [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP Guenter Roeck
2010-09-27 11:59 ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Guenter Roeck
2010-09-27 12:59 ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if Ingo Molnar
2010-09-27 12:59   ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Ingo Molnar
2010-09-27 13:02   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if Pekka Enberg
2010-09-27 13:02     ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Pekka Enberg
2010-09-27 23:27     ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if Guenter Roeck
2010-09-27 23:27       ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Guenter Roeck
2010-09-27 23:44       ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if Linus Torvalds
2010-09-27 23:44         ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Linus Torvalds
2010-09-28  0:07         ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2010-09-28  0:07           ` Guenter Roeck
2010-09-28  0:26         ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if Guenter Roeck
2010-09-28  0:26           ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Guenter Roeck
2010-09-28  1:00           ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if Linus Torvalds
2010-09-28  1:00             ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Linus Torvalds
2010-09-28  1:12             ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if Guenter Roeck
2010-09-28  1:12               ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Guenter Roeck
2010-09-27 13:15   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if Guenter Roeck
2010-09-27 13:15     ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Guenter Roeck
2010-09-27 14:40   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if Guenter Roeck
2010-09-27 14:40     ` [PATCH v2] hwmon (coretemp): Fix build breakage if SMP is undefined Guenter Roeck

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100928000704.GB4875@ericsson.com \
    --to=guenter.roeck@ericsson.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.