From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: mm: Do not iterate over NR_CPUS in __zone_pcp_update()
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 16:02:31 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1003091559220.12433@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1003091454210.28897@router.home>
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> > > I'm having trouble working out whether we want to backport this into
> > > 2.6.33.x or earlier. Help?
> >
> > given the above aesthetic mod, shouldn't that same change be
> > applied to *all* explicit loops of that form? after all,
> > checkpatch.pl warns against it:
>
> The number of NR_CPUS should be significantly less after the percpu
> rework. Would you audit the kernel for NR_CPUS use?
i just did a simple grep for the obvious pattern:
$ grep -r "for.*NR_CPUS" *
arch/sparc/mm/init_64.c: for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++)
arch/sparc/kernel/sun4d_smp.c: for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) {
arch/sparc/kernel/traps_64.c: for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) {
... etc etc ...
most of the occurrences are under arch/. as you say, after the
rework, most of those should be replaceable.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: mm: Do not iterate over NR_CPUS in __zone_pcp_update()
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 16:02:31 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1003091559220.12433@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1003091454210.28897@router.home>
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> > > I'm having trouble working out whether we want to backport this into
> > > 2.6.33.x or earlier. Help?
> >
> > given the above aesthetic mod, shouldn't that same change be
> > applied to *all* explicit loops of that form? after all,
> > checkpatch.pl warns against it:
>
> The number of NR_CPUS should be significantly less after the percpu
> rework. Would you audit the kernel for NR_CPUS use?
i just did a simple grep for the obvious pattern:
$ grep -r "for.*NR_CPUS" *
arch/sparc/mm/init_64.c: for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++)
arch/sparc/kernel/sun4d_smp.c: for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) {
arch/sparc/kernel/traps_64.c: for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) {
... etc etc ...
most of the occurrences are under arch/. as you say, after the
rework, most of those should be replaceable.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-09 21:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-08 9:21 mm: Do not iterate over NR_CPUS in __zone_pcp_update() Thomas Gleixner
2010-03-08 9:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-03-08 13:29 ` Pekka Enberg
2010-03-08 13:29 ` Pekka Enberg
2010-03-09 2:06 ` Tejun Heo
2010-03-09 2:06 ` Tejun Heo
2010-03-09 15:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-09 15:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-09 20:04 ` Pekka Enberg
2010-03-09 20:04 ` Pekka Enberg
2010-03-09 20:19 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-09 20:19 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-08 15:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-08 15:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-08 16:09 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-08 16:09 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-09 6:34 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-09 6:34 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-09 20:22 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-09 20:22 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-09 20:33 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-09 20:33 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-09 20:33 ` Robert P. J. Day
2010-03-09 20:33 ` Robert P. J. Day
2010-03-09 20:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-09 20:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-09 21:02 ` Robert P. J. Day [this message]
2010-03-09 21:02 ` Robert P. J. Day
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.1003091559220.12433@localhost \
--to=rpjday@crashcourse.ca \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.