Re: [Patch 1/2] CPU hotplug compatible alloc_percpu

Martin wrote:
> +static inline int percpu_populate_mask(void *__pdata, size_t size, gfp_t gfp,
> +				       int cpu)
> +{

It seems odd to me that this signature of percpu_populate_mask()
has its last argument 'int cpu' for the !CONFIG_SMP case, but
the SMP signatures have 'cpumask_t mask'.

Shouldn't this function signature be the same for all CONFIG's?

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [Patch 1/2] CPU hotplug compatible alloc_percpu
    • From: Martin Peschke <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [Patch 1/2] CPU hotplug compatible alloc_percpu
    • From: Martin Peschke <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
• Next by Date: Re: Generic battery interface
• Previous by thread: Re: [Patch 1/2] CPU hotplug compatible alloc_percpu
• Next by thread: Re: [Patch 1/2] CPU hotplug compatible alloc_percpu
• 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]