From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932968AbWFWJgO (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:36:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932971AbWFWJgO (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:36:14 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:3979 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932968AbWFWJgN (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:36:13 -0400 Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:30:59 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arjan@infradead.org, "Luck, Tony" , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Martin Schwidefsky , "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: [patch 22/61] lock validator: add per_cpu_offset() Message-ID: <20060623093059.GC4889@elte.hu> References: <20060529212109.GA2058@elte.hu> <20060529212457.GV3155@elte.hu> <20060529183458.ebb74ff8.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060529183458.ebb74ff8.akpm@osdl.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamScore: -3.1 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-3.1 required=5.9 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_50 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -3.3 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts 0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.5001] 0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andrew Morton wrote: > > +#define per_cpu_offset(x) (__per_cpu_offset(x)) > > + > > /* Separate out the type, so (int[3], foo) works. */ > > #define DEFINE_PER_CPU(type, name) \ > > __attribute__((__section__(".data.percpu"))) __typeof__(type) per_cpu__##name > > I can tell just looking at it that it'll break various builds.I assume > that things still happen to compile because you're presently using it > in code which those architectures don't presently compile. > > But introducing a "generic" function invites others to start using it. > And they will, and they'll ship code which "works" but is broken, > because they only tested it on x86 and x86_64. > > I'll queue the needed fixups - please check it. [belated reply] They look good. Ingo