Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Oct 2013 15:55:47 +0000 | From | Christoph Lameter <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/6] percpu: Add preemption checks to __this_cpu ops |
| |
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 03:09:13PM +0000, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > So I didn't understand what was wrong with: > > > > > > #define __this_cpu_read(pcp) \ > > > (__this_cpu_preempt_check("read"), raw_this_cpu_read(pcp)) > > > > > > And idem for all others. This is 1) shorter to write; and 2) makes it > > > blindingly obvious that the implementations are actually the same. > > > > Nothing wrong with that. It just increases the scope of this patch to > > require modifications to arch code and I already have trouble enough > > following through on all the issues that were raised so far. > > > > But non of your raw ops touch arch code... /me confused.
Yes that is intentional to limit scope. Renaming would require arch changes.
The __this_cpu_xxxs are defined in arch code. Look at x86 arch implementations for example. arch/x86/include/asm/percpu.h. s390 also has this. Not sure if other arches do.
| |