![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
> I don't see what you gain from having the cpumask type but having
> to get at its internals with the bitop functions.
The essential gain, in my view, of cpumask, is that it encapsulates
the value NR_CPUS. cpumasks are bitmaps of length NR_CPUS.
Yes, there is an open issue of whether cpumasks are worth it.
I think enough code has taken to them that they are.
The getting at internals (via cpus_addr(), I'm guessing you mean)
was a workaround for some code that messed with cpumasks and simple
unsigned longs as if they were interoperable. "cpus_addr" should
be marked deprecated, and its use coded out. Its remaining uses
are in arch-specific areas where I lack the expertise and testing
environment to accomplish such.
I needed some legacy mechanism such as this, in order to avoid
having such existing uses bring the entire cpumask overhaul to
a screeching halt.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373
-
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/
| ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:03 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||