From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
To: Shailabh Nagar <nagar@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net,
Mike Kravetz <mkravetz@sequent.com>
Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] Re: CPU affinity & IPI latency
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 13:51:10 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <XFMail.20010715135110.davidel@xmailserver.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OF0C6F5F92.24F5EA98-ON85256A88.006DDC58@pok.ibm.com>
On 13-Jul-2001 Shailabh Nagar wrote:
> That is true to an extent. It would be convenient for us as scheduler
> rewriters to have neatly differentiated classes like UP, SMP, BIG_SMP, NUMA
> etc. But it forces all other scheduler-sensitive code to think of each of
> these cases separately and is exactly the reason why #ifdef's are
> discouraged for critical kernel code like the scheduler.
Personally I hate #ifdef's inside the code more than my cat water, but something
like :
[sched.c]
#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_XXX
#include "sched_xxx.c"
#else
#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_YYY
#include "sched_yyy.c"
...
#endif
looks pretty clean to me.
- Davide
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-07-15 20:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-13 20:17 [Lse-tech] Re: CPU affinity & IPI latency Shailabh Nagar
2001-07-15 20:51 ` Davide Libenzi [this message]
[not found] <OF408C990D.63BC0397-ON85256A88.005CF33B@pok.ibm.com>
2001-07-13 18:27 ` Hubertus Frnake
2001-07-17 14:20 ` Hubertus Frnake
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-07-13 19:17 Davide Libenzi
2001-07-13 19:39 ` [Lse-tech] " Gerrit Huizenga
2001-07-13 20:05 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-07-13 17:05 Mike Kravetz
2001-07-13 19:51 ` David Lang
2001-07-13 22:43 ` Mike Kravetz
2001-07-15 20:02 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-07-15 20:10 ` [Lse-tech] " Andi Kleen
2001-07-15 20:15 ` Andi Kleen
2001-07-16 15:46 ` [Lse-tech] " Mike Kravetz
2001-07-12 23:40 Mike Kravetz
2001-07-15 7:42 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2001-07-15 9:05 ` [Lse-tech] " Andi Kleen
2001-07-15 17:00 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2001-07-16 0:58 ` Mike Kravetz
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=XFMail.20010715135110.davidel@xmailserver.org \
--to=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=mkravetz@sequent.com \
--cc=nagar@us.ibm.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