Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Fri, 9 May 2003 11:15:35 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: 2.5.69-mm3 |
| |
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 11:12:57AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > topology.h has a syntactic hygiene issue where it has a for () loop with > an if () in the body defined as a macro: > #define foo(...) for (...) if (...) > This patch prepares some of the bitop definitions used for the loop > mechanics to be usable in headers where BITS_PER_LONG is not guaranteed > to be defined for some reason. It removes the #ifdef on BITS_PER_LONG > in favor of if (sizeof(...) == ...) tests so hweight_long() will be > defined even when BITS_PER_LONG is not. unsigned long is also used for > some variables and/or return types that changed size with BITS_PER_LONG. > The 32-bit generic_hweight64() also changed its argument from a pointer > to a u64, which actually makes for a consistent interface in both cases. > The follow-up will make use of this to clean up the hygiene issue above > and correct a compilation error in topology.h
diff -urpN mm3-2.5.69-1/include/linux/topology.h mm3-2.5.69-2/include/linux/topology.h --- mm3-2.5.69-1/include/linux/topology.h 2003-05-09 09:22:16.000000000 -0700 +++ mm3-2.5.69-2/include/linux/topology.h 2003-05-09 10:29:08.000000000 -0700 @@ -32,8 +32,15 @@ #define nr_cpus_node(node) (hweight_long(node_to_cpumask(node))) +static inline int __next_node_with_cpus(int node) +{ + do + ++node; + while (!nr_cpus_node(node) && node < numnodes); + return node; +} + #define for_each_node_with_cpus(node) \ - for (node = 0; node < numnodes; node++) \ - if (nr_cpus_node(node) + for (node = 0; node < numnodes; node = __next_node_with_cpus(node)) #endif /* _LINUX_TOPOLOGY_H */ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |