Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 12 Sep 2008 07:17:08 -0700 | | From | Mike Travis <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] cpumask: add for_each_online_cpu_mask_nr function |
| |
Rusty Russell wrote: > On Wednesday 10 September 2008 01:50:14 Mike Travis wrote: >> * Add for_each_online_cpu_mask_nr() function to eliminate need for >> a common use of a temporary cpumask_t variable. When the following >> procedure is being used: >> >> funcproto(cpumask_t *mask, ...) >> { >> cpumask_t temp; >> >> cpus_and(temp, *mask, cpu_online_map); >> for_each_cpu_mask_nr(cpu, temp) >> ... >> >> If then becomes: >> >> funcproto(cpumask_t *mask, ...) >> { >> for_each_online_cpu_mask_nr(cpu, *mask) >> ... >> >> * Note the generic __next_cpu_and (and __next_cpu_and_nr) functions >> allowing AND'ing with any cpumask_t variable, not just the >> cpu_online_map. > > Good idea! But I really dislike the _nr versions (too many names!). Do we > really need them, since by definition cpus after nr_cpu_ids are never > online... > > (And we should initialize nr_cpu_ids to NR_CPUS so even early boot works, if > we don't already...). > > Cheers, > Rusty.
Yes, the only reason the _nr is there is to be consistent with the current for_each_cpu_mask{,_nr} functions. What I'd like to do is convert all calls to use the nr_cpu_ids and if there's some reason to need to iterate over NR_CPUS range, then you'd use FOR_EACH_CPU_MASK. And yes, nr_cpu_ids is init'd to NR_CPUS.
Thanks, Mike
|  |