Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:40:55 +0200 | From | Michal Simek <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 13/16] percpu: remove per_cpu__ prefix. |
| |
Tejun Heo wrote: > (microblaze maintainer cc'd, hello) > > Christoph Lameter wrote: >> On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Tejun Heo wrote: >> >>> @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ extern void *per_cpu_init(void); >>> * On the positive side, using __ia64_per_cpu_var() instead of __get_cpu_var() is slightly >>> * more efficient. >>> */ >>> -#define __ia64_per_cpu_var(var) per_cpu__##var >>> +#define __ia64_per_cpu_var(var) var >> IA64 could completely drop the macro? Tony? > > Being discussed but I think we should just add sparse annotation there > instead. > >>> diff --git a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/entry.h b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/entry.h >>> index 61abbd2..ec89f2a 100644 >>> --- a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/entry.h >>> +++ b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/entry.h >>> @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ >>> * places >>> */ >>> >>> -#define PER_CPU(var) per_cpu__##var >>> +#define PER_CPU(var) var >> Microblaze too. > > This macro is used only in assemblies which wouldn't be covered by > sparse so in this case this patch series actually removes protection, > so I wasn't too sure about ripping the macro off. Any ideas what we > can do here? Just kill it?
If I understand correctly, functionality will be the same. But anyway I would like to mot lose information about per_cpu variables. That's why please keep that macro for Microblaze. If is the problem, you should convince me why to do it.
Thanks, Michal
-- Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng) w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854 Maintainer of Linux kernel 2.6 Microblaze Linux - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/ Microblaze U-BOOT custodian
| |