Re: [PATCH] make schedule_on_each_cpu() look like on_each_cpu()

On 07/26, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 07/26, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > -int schedule_on_each_cpu(work_func_t func)
> > +int schedule_on_each_cpu(void (*func)(void *info), void *info, int retry, int wait)
> >  {
> >  	int cpu;
> > -	struct work_struct *works;
> > +	struct schedule_on_each_cpu_work **works;
> > +	int err = 0;
> >  
> > -	works = alloc_percpu(struct work_struct);
> > +	works = kzalloc(sizeof(void *)*nr_cpu_ids, GFP_KERNEL);
> 
> Not a comment, but a question: why do we need nr_cpu_ids at all?
> num_possible_cpus() looks more "correct" if cpu_possible_map has
> holes (not sure this can happen in practice).

OOPS, I am stupid, please ignore. Of course, we need the highest CPU
number, not num_possible_cpus().

Oleg.

-
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] make schedule_on_each_cpu() look like on_each_cpu()
    • From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] make schedule_on_each_cpu() look like on_each_cpu()
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] make schedule_on_each_cpu() look like on_each_cpu()
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: ipv6_addr_type() doesn't know about RFC4193 addresses
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] make schedule_on_each_cpu() look like on_each_cpu()
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] make schedule_on_each_cpu() look like on_each_cpu()
• 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]