Re: [PATCH] 2.5.1-pre5: per-cpu areas

Rusty Russell (rusty@rustcorp.com.au)
Sun, 17 Mar 2002 18:17:32 +1100


On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:13:09 +0100
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 03:07:27PM +1100, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > They must return an lvalue, otherwise they're useless for 50% of cases
> > (ie. assignment). x86_64 can still use its own mechanism for
> > arch-specific per-cpu data, of course.
>
> Assignment should use an own macro (set_this_cpu()) or use per_cpu().

So, we'd have "get_this_cpu(x)" and "set_this_cpu(x, y)". So far, so good.

struct myinfo
{
int x;
int y;
};

static struct myinfo mystuff __per_cpu_data;

Now how do we set mystuff.x on this CPU?

I just think you're going to have to live with the generic implementation.
It's really not that bad 8)

Sorry,
Rusty.

-- 
  Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/