Re: [PATCH 17/20] SMP: Implement on_cpu()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Satyam Sharma wrote:

And I think what's proposed is:

1. Change smp_call_function() semantics, to run given function
on _all_ CPUs (thus getting rid of the on_each_cpu() "mistake")

2. Resort to (most probably implement another function?) using
smp_call_function_mask() or flags appropriately to also serve
the use cases where we need to run a given function on all
_other_ CPUs

Does this pointless/gratuitous code-churn really make sense?
Definitely not to me ...


It's not proposed. Andi mentioned it in passing. The only churn is in this thread.


[ For the _single() case we now have on_cpu() as you originally
proposed, which I definitely like and fills the other gap in the API. ]

So I still don't quite understand what is the need to change existing
semantics of smp_call_function{_single} in the first place.


I imagine Andi's motivation was that most uses benefit from this change, and the rest don't suffer. It's better not to have a proliferation of ever-so-similar APIs.


--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

-
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]
  Powered by Linux