Re: [PATCH -tip/cpus4096-v2] cpumask: fix cpumask of call_function_data

[Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com>]

Rusty Russell wrote:
...
> From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
> cpumask: smp_call_function_many()
> 
> Actually change smp_call_function_mask() to smp_call_function_many().
> 
> S390 has its own version, so we do trivial conversion on that too.
> 
> We have to do some dancing to figure out if 0 or 1 other cpus are in
> the mask supplied and the online mask without allocating a tmp
> cpumask.  It's still fairly cheap.
> 
> We allocate the cpumask at the end of the call_function_data
> structure: if allocation fails we fallback to smp_call_function_single
> rather than using the baroque quiescing code.
> 
> (Thanks to Hiroshi Shimamoto for spotting several bugs in previous versions!)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
> Cc: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com>
> Cc: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com
> Cc: heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com

Hi Rusty,

I'd like to know which tree this patch is against for.

thanks,
Hiroshi Shimamoto