lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: mmotm 2013-02-19-17-20 uploaded
On 2/21/2013 10:35 AM, Nathan Zimmer wrote:
>
>> This comment is useful around the cpumask functions.
>>
>> Returns >= nr_cpu_ids if no further cpus set.
>>
> I had assumed it would be = nr_cpu_ids.
> I will need to rethink the iterator.

Yes it is actually equal to the nr_cpu_ids in my error case. On my
system, nr_cpu_ids = 4 and I only have one cpu online.

>
>
> Also I retested my other patches in the series, the ones for schedstat
> and sched_debug, and those worked fine.

I haven't tried those yet. I will try to take a look.

Also, can't we simplify the code by calling cpumask_next() with the
first argument being -1? No more cpu > 0 check?

--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-21 21:42    [W:0.674 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site