[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] improve the first percpu chunk allocation
    Hello, Ingo.

    Patches posted to fix the build failure and warning. Patches are also
    available in the usual git tree.

    git:// tj-percpu

    Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > and one tip:master merge impact due to API change:
    > kernel/trace/trace_functions_graph.c: In function ‘graph_trace_close’:
    > kernel/trace/trace_functions_graph.c:836: error: implicit declaration of function ‘percpu_free’
    > that's free_percpu() now, right?
    > Btw., why was this rename done? We generally standardize on
    > hierarchical names, going from the more general to the more
    > specific names, left to right. So we have
    > <subsystem>_<functionality>_<subtype> sort of names generally.

    It's a strange story and not really a rename.

    We had __percpu_alloc_mask(), percpu_alloc(), __alloc_percpu() and
    alloc_percpu() and of course matching frees. The percpu_*() stuff was
    introduced so that allocations can take online cpus into
    consideration. So, percpu_alloc() uses cpu_online_map as the default
    allocation mask while alloc_percpu() uses cpu_possible_map. The
    allocation mask thing never really took off and there virtually was no
    user and got killed.

    If the only merge impact was percpu_free() and it's not missing
    percpu_alloc(), it could be that allocation path used alloc_percpu()
    but free path used percpu_free().


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-02-25 03:27    [W:0.022 / U:0.572 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site