Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:14:27 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/6] {set,clear,test}_bit() related cleanup |
| |
Hi!
> While working on these patch set, I found several possible cleanup > on x86-64 and ia64.
It is probably not your fault, but...
> Index: 2.6-git/include/asm-x86_64/mmu_context.h > =================================================================== > --- 2.6-git.orig/include/asm-x86_64/mmu_context.h 2006-01-25 19:07:15.000000000 +0900 > +++ 2.6-git/include/asm-x86_64/mmu_context.h 2006-01-25 19:13:59.000000000 +0900 > @@ -34,12 +34,12 @@ > unsigned cpu = smp_processor_id(); > if (likely(prev != next)) { > /* stop flush ipis for the previous mm */ > - clear_bit(cpu, &prev->cpu_vm_mask); > + cpu_clear(cpu, prev->cpu_vm_mask); > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP > write_pda(mmu_state, TLBSTATE_OK); > write_pda(active_mm, next); > #endif > - set_bit(cpu, &next->cpu_vm_mask); > + cpu_set(cpu, next->cpu_vm_mask); > load_cr3(next->pgd); > > if (unlikely(next->context.ldt != prev->context.ldt))
cpu_set sounds *very* ambiguous. We have thing called cpusets, for example. I'd not guess that is set_bit in cpu endianity (is it?).
Pavel -- Thanks, Sharp! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |