All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [this_cpu_xx V6 3/7] Use this_cpu operations in slub
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 12:11:23 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4ADA875B.1070102@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0910161232420.6120@gentwo.org>

Hello, Christoph.

Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> The biggest grief I have is that the meaning of __ is different among
>> different accessors.  If that can be cleared up, we would be in much
>> better shape without adding any extra macros.  Can we just remove all
>> __'s and use meaningful pre or suffixes like raw or irq or whatever?
> 
> It currently means that we do not deal with preempt and do not check for
> preemption. That is consistent.

If you define it inclusively, it can be consistent.

> Sure we could change the API to have even more macros than the large
> amount it already has so that we can check for proper preempt disablement.
> 
> I guess that would mean adding
> 
> raw_nopreempt_this_cpu_xx  and nopreempt_this_cpu_xx variants? The thing
> gets huge. I think we could just leave it. __ suggests that serialization
> and checking is not performed like in the full versions and that is true.

I don't think we'll need to add new variants.  Just renaming existing
ones so that they have more specific pre/suffix should make things
clearer.  I'll give a shot at that once the sparse annotation patchset
is merged.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2009-10-18  3:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-10-07 21:10 [this_cpu_xx V6 0/7] Introduce per cpu atomic operations and avoid per cpu address arithmetic cl
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 1/7] this_cpu_ops: page allocator conversion cl
2009-10-08 10:38   ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-08 10:40     ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-08 16:15     ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-08 10:53   ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 2/7] this_cpu ops: Remove pageset_notifier cl
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 3/7] Use this_cpu operations in slub cl
2009-10-12 10:19   ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-12 10:21     ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-12 14:54     ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13  2:13       ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-13 14:41         ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 14:56           ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-13 15:20             ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14  1:57               ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 14:14                 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-15  7:47                   ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-16 16:44                     ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-18  3:11                       ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 4/7] SLUB: Get rid of dynamic DMA kmalloc cache allocation cl
2009-10-13 18:48   ` [FIX] patch "SLUB: Get rid of dynamic DMA kmalloc cache allocation" Christoph Lameter
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 5/7] this_cpu: Remove slub kmem_cache fields cl
2009-10-07 23:10   ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 6/7] Make slub statistics use this_cpu_inc cl
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 7/7] this_cpu: slub aggressive use of this_cpu operations in the hotpaths cl
2009-10-12 10:40   ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-12 13:14     ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-12 14:55       ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13  9:45       ` David Rientjes
2009-10-13 14:43         ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 19:14           ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 19:44             ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-13 19:48               ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 20:15                 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-13 20:28                   ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 22:53                     ` David Rientjes
2009-10-14 13:34                       ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-14 14:08                         ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 15:49                           ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-14 15:53                             ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-14 15:56                               ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 16:14                                 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-14 18:19                                   ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-16 10:50                                 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-16 18:40                                   ` David Rientjes
2009-10-15  9:03                         ` David Rientjes
2009-10-16 16:45                           ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-16 18:43                             ` David Rientjes
2009-10-16 18:50                               ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 20:25               ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14  1:33           ` David Rientjes
2009-10-13 15:40 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 0/7] Introduce per cpu atomic operations and avoid per cpu address arithmetic Mel Gorman
2009-10-13 15:45   ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 16:09     ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-13 17:17       ` Christoph Lameter

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=4ADA875B.1070102@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
    --cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
    /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.