From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932961AbXIGPyP (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 11:54:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932617AbXIGPx7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 11:53:59 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-4-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.29]:55821 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757089AbXIGPx7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 11:53:59 -0400 Message-ID: <46E17282.9030902@sgi.com> Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2007 08:47:14 -0700 From: Mike Travis User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: Andi Kleen , clameter@sgi.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] core: fix build error when referencing arch specific structures References: <20070907040943.467530005@sgi.com> <200709070828.05730.ak@suse.de> <20070907035632.13ceb928.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070907035632.13ceb928.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Fri, 7 Sep 2007 08:28:05 +0100 Andi Kleen wrote: >> On Friday 07 September 2007 05:09, travis@sgi.com wrote: >>> Since the core kernel routines need to reference cpu_sibling_map, >>> whether it be a static array or a per_cpu data variable, an access >>> function has been defined. >>> >>> In addition, changes have been made to the ia64 and ppc64 arch's to >>> move the cpu_sibling_map from a static cpumask_t array [NR_CPUS] to >>> be per_cpu cpumask_t arrays. >>> >>> Note that I do not have the ability to build or test patch 3/3, the >>> ppc64 changes. >>> >>> Patches are referenced against 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 . >> It would be better if you could redo the patches with the original patches >> reverted, not incremental changes. In the end we'll need a full patch set >> with full changelog anyways, not a series of incremental fixes. > > yup > >> Also I guess some powerpc testers would be needed. Perhaps cc the >> maintainers? >> > > yup > > All architectures except sparc64 are now done - please have a shot at doing > sparc64 as well. Ok, will do. I didn't realize there was only one more that used the SCHED_SMT code. > > I'd suggest that we not implement that cpu_sibling_map() macro and just > open-code the per_cpu() everywhere. So henceforth any architecture which > implements CONFIG_SCHED_SMT must implement the per-cpu sibling map. Yes, with only one more to do it's not that daunting. ;-) > That's nice and simple, and avoids the unpleasant > pretend-function-used-as-an-lvalue trick. (Well OK, per_cpu() does > that, but let's avoid resinning). Yes, the per_cpu macro is quite the specimen. ;-) Thanks! Mike