From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756677AbZE2JrC (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2009 05:47:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753087AbZE2Jqx (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2009 05:46:53 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:34268 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752893AbZE2Jqx (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2009 05:46:53 -0400 Message-ID: <4A1FAEE2.1020906@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 18:46:10 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20081227) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Lameter CC: Christoph Hellwig , Rusty Russell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Howells , Ingo Molnar , Eric Dumazet , davem@davemloft.net Subject: Re: [my_cpu_ptr 1/5] Introduce my_cpu_ptr() References: <20090527180635.008102701@gentwo.org> <20090527180714.834691580@gentwo.org> <200905281316.01923.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <20090528161028.GA20190@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (hera.kernel.org [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 29 May 2009 09:46:14 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 28 May 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 01:16:01PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: >>> On Thu, 28 May 2009 03:16:59 am cl@linux-foundation.org wrote: >>>> my_cpu_ptr(xx) = per_cpu_ptr(xx, smp_processor_id). >>> I had this implemented earlier as as get_cpu_ptr()/__get_cpu_ptr(), to match >>> get_cpu_var() / __get_cpu_var(). >>> >>> But other than that nomenclature quibble, it looks fine! >> my_ seems a very odd naming. We have a lot of this_cpu naming for the >> current cpu i nthe ctree, so I would suggest sticking to that. > > So this_cpu is taken. I used THIS_CPU in earlier version > but got complaints about uppercase use. Is > > this_cpu_ptr() > > and > > __this_cpu_ptr() > > ok? Yeap, those look fine to me. Sans the renaming, the series generally looks good but I didn't review each conversion. For the first patch, Acked-by: Tejun Heo Thanks. -- tejun