From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
RongQing Li <roy.qing.li@gmail.com>,
Shan Wei <davidshan@tencent.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PERCPU] Remove & in front of this_cpu_ptr
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 14:29:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1365024575.13853.39.camel@edumazet-glaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130403212450.GD3411@htj.dyndns.org>
On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 14:24 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> I don't know about this one. I actually prefer the latter in that the
> pointer being passed into this_cpu_ptr() is something which is the
> actual percpu pointer either from variable declaration or the
> allocator. Sure, they both are just different expressions of the same
> thing but the former requires an extra guarantee from percpu subsystem
> that the accessors would work for pointers which aren't the exact
> values defined or allocated. I'd much prefer unfiying things toward
> the latter than the former.
I agree with you, I prefer &this_cpu_ptr(percpu_pointer)->field
The offset is added after getting the address of the (percpu) base
object.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-03 21:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-28 9:42 [PATCH] core: fix the use of this_cpu_ptr roy.qing.li
2013-03-28 13:05 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-03-28 14:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-03-28 15:36 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-03-28 16:44 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-03-29 1:24 ` RongQing Li
2013-04-01 15:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-04-01 16:31 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-01 18:15 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-04-03 20:41 ` this cpu documentation Christoph Lameter
2013-04-03 21:18 ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-04 0:09 ` Randy Dunlap
2013-04-04 14:41 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-04-04 16:28 ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-04 17:19 ` Randy Dunlap
2013-04-04 17:26 ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-04 17:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-04-04 18:35 ` Randy Dunlap
2013-04-04 18:52 ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-11 17:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304031540110.3444@gentwo.org>
2013-04-03 20:42 ` [PERCPU] Remove & in front of this_cpu_ptr Christoph Lameter
2013-04-03 21:24 ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-03 21:29 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2013-04-04 13:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-04-04 14:00 ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-04 14:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-04-04 14:25 ` Tejun Heo
2013-04-04 15:02 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-04-04 14:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-03-29 19:13 ` [PATCH] core: fix the use " David Miller
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=1365024575.13853.39.camel@edumazet-glaptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=davidshan@tencent.com \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roy.qing.li@gmail.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