Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:59:16 +1100 | | From | Nick Piggin <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Introduce nodemask_t ADT [0/7] |
| |
William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 08:19:54PM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote: > >>Find by me if folks have their dirty laundry. There are limits to my >>powers to set things right. >>Sorry to have provoked your length explanation of physical_balance, but >>in the version of the kernel that I happened to do my research on, >>2.6.3-rc1-mm1, this is _dead_ code. The variable physical_balance is >>never read, just written, and only appears on 3 lines total. >>Obviously if it is in use in current versions of the kernel, then it's >>not dead code anymore (at least not without a more profound >>understanding of what's going on, which I make no claims to). >> > >There's probably something in -mm reducing its use that I haven't >looked at; the digression there was based on mainline. > >
I think it is my patch that makes cpu_sibling_map a cpumask.
You don't need a special case for num_siblings == 2 anymore. I forgot to clean up the last trace of physical_balance.
- 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/
|  |