Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlockimplementation

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 03:41:33PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> It is exactly 16k-1 not 15k
> That is because CPU_CODE of 1 to 16k represents cpu 0..16k-1
> 

More specifically:

+       BUILD_BUG_ON(CONFIG_NR_CPUS >= MAX_CPUS);

Our NR_CPUS is very much a power of two.
--
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/