Re: [v7 1/8] smp: introduce a generic on_each_cpu_mask function

[Andrew Morton]

On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 14:24:16 +0200
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > on_each_cpu_mask calls a function on processors specified by
> > cpumask, which may or may not include the local processor.
> >
> > You must not call this function with disabled interrupts or
> > from a hardware interrupt handler or from a bottom half handler.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ...
> > ---
> > __include/linux/smp.h | __ 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > __kernel/smp.c __ __ __ __| __ 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > __2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> 
> 
> Milton made the very sensible comment that while adding on_each_cpu() in the
> arch generic code and removing the two arch specific instances from tile and arm
> in separate patches is good for review, it will break bisect.
> 
> He suggested I squash  them into a single commit when it goes in.
> 
> Since you picked the patch set into linux-mm, will now be a good time for that?

I can fold the patches together - I do that all the time.

Please identify exactly whcih patches you're referring to here.  

arm-move-arm-over-to-generic-on_each_cpu_mask and
tile-move-tile-to-use-generic-on_each_cpu_mask should be folded into
smp-introduce-a-generic-on_each_cpu_mask-function, yes?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/