>>>>> On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 15:07:27 +1100, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> said:
Rusty> Sorry, after thought, I've reverted to my original position. the
Rusty> original SMP per_cpu()/this_cpu() implementations were broken.
Rusty> They must return an lvalue, otherwise they're useless for 50% of cases
Rusty> (ie. assignment). x86_64 can still use its own mechanism for
Rusty> arch-specific per-cpu data, of course.
What's your position about someone taking the address of this_cpu(foo)
and passing it to another CPU? IMO, the effect of this should be
allowed to be implementation-dependent. If you agree, perhaps it
would be good to add a comment to this effect?
--david
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 15 2002 - 22:00:19 EST