[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:0.140 / U:0.572 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site