From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cputopology: Always define CPU topology information [4th try]
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:28:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080605092831.a77d164d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080605120829.GI11300@solarflare.com>
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:08:30 +0100 Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 16:44:56 +0100 Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Not all architectures and configurations define CPU topology information.
> > > This can result in an empty topology directory in sysfs, and requires
> > > in-kernel users to protect all uses with #ifdef - see
> > > <http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=120639033904472&w=2>.
> > >
> > > The documentation of CPU topology specifies what the defaults should be
> > > if only partial information is available from the hardware. So we can
> > > provide these defaults as a fallback.
> > >
> > > This patch:
> > >
> > > - Adds default definitions of the 4 topology macros to <linux/topology.h>
> > > - Changes drivers/base/topology.c to use the topology macros unconditionally
> > > and to cope with definitions that aren't lvalues
> > > - Updates documentation accordingly
> >
> > See, this is what I meant. After your patch we have:
> [...]
>
> Sorry, I don't know how that escaped me. My changes to the show functions
> should be unnecessary - though I think that the two different implementations
> for lvalues and rvalues are a premature optimisation.
um, what does this mean. Will you be sending an updated patch or should
I drop those two or...?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-05 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-04 15:44 [PATCH] cputopology: Always define CPU topology information [4th try] Ben Hutchings
2008-06-05 4:47 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-05 12:08 ` Ben Hutchings
2008-06-05 16:28 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-06-05 16:37 ` [PATCH] cputopology: Always define CPU topology information [5th try] Ben Hutchings
2008-06-13 5:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-13 10:15 ` Ben Hutchings
2008-06-13 11:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-13 15:36 ` Ben Hutchings
2008-07-16 21:37 ` [PATCH] cputopology: Always define CPU topology information [4th try] Nathan Lynch
2008-07-16 22:49 ` Ben Hutchings
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=20080605092831.a77d164d.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox