Re: [RFC/PATCH] Make for_each_node_mask out-of-line

["Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@fastmail.fm>]

On Sun, 11 May 2008 16:01:04 -0500, "Paul Jackson" <pj@sgi.com> said:
> Alexander wrote:
> > Sure. This patch introduces lib/nodemask.c, but I'm not quite sure
> > if building it should depend on CONFIG_SMP or something else (NUMA?).
> > When is MAX_NUMNODES 1?
> 
> Well ... I'm pretty sure it made sense to depend on SMP, back when
> it was first added.  However that might have changed.  I recall
> vaguely that there has been discussion of this CONFIG_SMP dependency
> every year or so, but I don't have the time right now to dig through
> the archives and code to figure it out.
> 
> So ... offhand ... good questions, but I don't have answers.
> 
> > I'ld be happy to take a stab at aligning the cpumask and nodemask
> > code even more by uninlining some more functions and using stubs
> > for the MAX_NUMNODES=1 case.
> 
> That could be good ... though could you co-ordinate with Mike Travis
> first, to minimize the risks of merge conflicts with what he's doing?

I believe the x86#testing tree includes Mike's work? The two patches
in this thread apply fine to current x86#testing.

> You kernel text space saving in the first patch seemed worth going
> ahead with even if it did conflict a little, and I liked the matching
> nodemask patch, just to keep things in sync.  Other nodemask cleanup
> is a little lower priority in my book, so should make a modest effort
> to co-ordinate with more critical patches, to minimize conflict.

Thanks for your guidance.

Greetings,
    Alexander

> -- 
>                   I won't rest till it's the best ...
>                   Programmer, Linux Scalability
>                   Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.940.382.4214
-- 
  Alexander van Heukelum
  heukelum@fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software
                          or over the web