Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:07:35 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH, RFC, tip/core/rcu] scalable classic RCU implementation |
| |
* Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Is this a sufficient improvement?
yeah - looks much better. This was the block that meets the eye for the first time in the patch so it stuck out.
just one more small pet peeve of mine: please use vertical alignment too to improve readability. Instead of:
> #define MAX_RCU_LEVELS 3 > #define RCU_FANOUT (CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT) > #define RCU_FANOUT_SQ (RCU_FANOUT * RCU_FANOUT) > #define RCU_FANOUT_CUBE (RCU_FANOUT_SQ * RCU_FANOUT)
this looks a bit more structured IMO:
> #define MAX_RCU_LEVELS 3 > #define RCU_FANOUT (CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT) > #define RCU_FANOUT_SQ (RCU_FANOUT * RCU_FANOUT) > #define RCU_FANOUT_CUBE (RCU_FANOUT_SQ * RCU_FANOUT)
maybe even this:
> #if (NR_CPUS) <= RCU_FANOUT > # define NUM_RCU_LVLS 1 > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_0 1 > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_1 (NR_CPUS) > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_2 0 > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_3 0 > #elif (NR_CPUS) <= RCU_FANOUT_SQ > # define NUM_RCU_LVLS 2 > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_0 1 > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_1 (((NR_CPUS) + RCU_FANOUT - 1) / RCU_FANOUT) > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_2 (NR_CPUS) > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_3 0 > #elif (NR_CPUS) <= RCU_FANOUT_CUBE > # define NUM_RCU_LVLS 3 > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_0 1 > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_1 (((NR_CPUS) + RCU_FANOUT_SQ - 1) / RCU_FANOUT_SQ) > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_2 (((NR_CPUS) + (RCU_FANOUT) - 1) / (RCU_FANOUT)) > # define NUM_RCU_LVL_3 NR_CPUS > #else > # error "CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT insufficient for NR_CPUS" > #endif /* #if (NR_CPUS) <= RCU_FANOUT */
but no strong feelings on that one. (maybe inserting a space at the right places helps too, no need for a full tab)
Ingo
| |