lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-19 15:43    [W:0.184 / U:7.740 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site