Re: [PATCH] highest_possible_processor_id() has to be a macro

On Sun, Oct 16, 2005 at 12:16:49AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
> Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:51:12 +0100
> 
> > 	... otherwise, things like alpha and sparc64 break and break
> > badly.  They define cpu_possible_map to something else in smp.h
> > *AFTER* having included cpumask.h.
> 
> So ugly...
> 
> But, it's the best fix for now.
> 
> Longer term we might want to make an asm/cpumask.h that can
> help allow the platforms to cleanly say "well, mask X is
> equivalent to Y, so only instantiate X and define Y to X"

Indeed, but playing with moving stuff from smp.h is definitely post-2.6.14
fodder...
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] highest_possible_processor_id() has to be a macro
    • From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] highest_possible_processor_id() has to be a macro
    • From: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH] rcu in drivers/net/hamradio
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] highest_possible_processor_id() has to be a macro
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] highest_possible_processor_id() has to be a macro
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] highest_possible_processor_id() has to be a macro
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]