From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758484Ab2CFHxm (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2012 02:53:42 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:36689 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758193Ab2CFHxl (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2012 02:53:41 -0500 Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 23:55:32 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Ingo Molnar Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, alex.shi@intel.com, cl@gentwo.org, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, tj@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [patch 5/8] x86: use this_cpu_xxx to replace percpu_xxx funcs Message-Id: <20120305235532.28f407bf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20120306074601.GD23669@elte.hu> References: <20120305230515.A9238A02AE@akpm.mtv.corp.google.com> <20120306074601.GD23669@elte.hu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 08:46:01 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote: > Will percpu_write() be removed altogether? If so then the > changelog should say *that*, and explain that on x86 this is a > simple renaming of the API, not a long explanation about > scenarios that don't actually matter. > > If percpu_write() is not being removed then I don't see how this > patch is an improvement: it's supposed to result in the same > instructions being emitted, and __this_cpu_write() et al are > distinctly longer to write ... > > So what's the plan here? All percpu_xxx() functions get removed. That was explained in the [patch 0/n] changelog (available on lkml ;)) but a) I chose to feed the prereq patches through maintainers and b) I didn't edit all the changelogs. I should have.