From: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>, Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] cpuset: convert cpuset_attach() to use cpumask_var_t
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:21:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4961D10B.5040106@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090105011414.176a5ee3.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>>> OK, that works.
>>>
>>> Do we need to dynamically allocate cpus_attach? Can we just do
>>>
>>> static cpumask_t cpus_attach;
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>> Yes, it's used by cpuset_attach() only, and cpuset_attach() is called with
>> cgroup_lock() held, so it won't happen that 2 threads access cpus_attach
>> concurrently.
>
> You misunderstand my question. I think.
>
> Can we allocate cpus_attach at compile time? Completely, not
> partially. By doing
>
> static cpumask_t cpus_attach;
>
> instead of
>
> static cpumask_var_t cpus_attach;
> ...
> alloc_cpumask_var(&cpus_attach, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> ?
Ah, I misunderstood. Yes a static cpumask_t works, but what Mike Travis and
Rusty is doing is to remove cpumask_t completely, and replace cpumask_t
with cpumask_var_t wherever possible.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-05 9:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-31 8:34 [PATCH 0/6] cpuset: convert to new cpumask API Li Zefan
2008-12-31 8:35 ` [PATCH 1/6] cpuset: remove on stack cpumask_t in cpuset_sprintf_cpulist() Li Zefan
2008-12-31 8:35 ` [PATCH 2/6] cpuset: remove on stack cpumask_t in cpuset_can_attach() Li Zefan
2008-12-31 8:36 ` [PATCH 3/6] cpuset: convert cpuset_attach() to use cpumask_var_t Li Zefan
2008-12-31 8:36 ` [PATCH 4/6] cpuset: don't allocate trial cpuset on stack Li Zefan
2008-12-31 8:37 ` [PATCH 5/6] cpuset: convert cpuset->cpus_allowed to cpumask_var_t Li Zefan
2008-12-31 8:37 ` [PATCH 6/6] cpuset: remove remaining pointers to cpumask_t Li Zefan
2009-01-05 7:46 ` [PATCH 4/6] cpuset: don't allocate trial cpuset on stack Andrew Morton
2009-01-05 9:13 ` Li Zefan
2009-01-05 7:38 ` [PATCH 3/6] cpuset: convert cpuset_attach() to use cpumask_var_t Andrew Morton
2009-01-05 8:47 ` Li Zefan
2009-01-05 9:01 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-05 9:04 ` Li Zefan
2009-01-05 9:14 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-05 9:21 ` Li Zefan [this message]
2009-01-07 2:04 ` Rusty Russell
2009-01-07 16:39 ` Paul Menage
2008-12-31 11:56 ` [PATCH 0/6] cpuset: convert to new cpumask API Mike Travis
2008-12-31 13:26 ` Rusty Russell
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=4961D10B.5040106@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=travis@sgi.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