![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Andrew wrote:
> hm. That hides what's really going on from the programmer.
>
> Oh well - you're the only guy who dinks with that stuff anyway ;)
Halloween comes a week early to the Morton household. The patch from
hell, circa April 2004, lives on to haunt Andrew <grin>.
By the time we (wli, rusty, colpatch, ...) incorporated the following
various constraints on these cpumask/nodemask macros, we were fortunate
to only violate the "obvious to the programmer" constraint on the
implementation internals:
- near perfect code gen on small systems (1 word masks)
- near perfect code gen on large systems (multiword masks)
- type checking on arguments
- keep the existing macro-style calling conventions:
cpus_and(result, input1, input2)
- a single bitmap internal implementation - the rest just wrappers
- dramatic shinkage of kernel source devoted to this stuff
- reduction in kernel text size across all architectures.
Probably it is best that we not ask too many questions at this time ;).
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401
-
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: 2005-10-24 14:43 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||