Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 17 May 2005, Matthew Dobson wrote:
>
>
>>You're right, Dave. The series of #defines at the top resolve to the same
>>thing as numa_node_id(). Adding the above #defines will serve only to
>>obfuscate the code.
>
>
> Ok.
>
>
>>Another thing that will really help, Christoph, would be replacing all your
>>open-coded for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUMNODES/NR_CPUS; i++) loops. We have
>>macros that make that all nice and clean and (should?) do the right thing
>>for various combinations of SMP/DISCONTIG/NUMA/etc. Use those and if they
>>DON'T do the right thing, please let me know and we'll fix them ASAP.
>
>
> Some of that was already done but I can check again.
Thanks! I just looked at V2 & V3 of the patch and saw some open-coded
loops. I may have missed a later version of the patch which has fixes.
Feel free to CC me on future versions of the patch...
-Matt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
