From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail190.messagelabs.com (mail190.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1406E6B009F for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 20:22:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.75]) by fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id o251Mo2F016622 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:22:50 +0900 Received: from smail (m5 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB25845DE59 for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:22:49 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.95]) by m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B196F45DE54 for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:22:49 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F5DCEF8004 for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:22:49 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.104]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D68BE38003 for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:22:49 +0900 (JST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:19:12 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/8] Numa: Use Generic Per-cpu Variables for numa_*_id() Message-Id: <20100305101912.f0a875df.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20100304170654.10606.32225.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> References: <20100304170654.10606.32225.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Lee Schermerhorn Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-numa@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo , Mel Gorman , Andi Kleen , Christoph Lameter , Nick Piggin , David Rientjes , akpm@linux-foundation.org, eric.whitney@hp.com List-ID: On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 12:06:54 -0500 Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > >nid-04: > > > >* Isn't #define numa_mem numa_node a bit dangerous? Someone might use > > numa_mem as a local variable name. Why not define it as a inline > > function or at least a macro which takes argument. > > numa_mem and numa_node are the names of the per cpu variables, referenced > by __this_cpu_read(). So, I suppose we can rename them both something like: > percpu_numa_*. Would satisfy your concern? > > What do others think? > > Currently I've left them as numa_mem and numa_node. > Could you add some documentation to Documentation/vm/numa ? about numa_node_id() numa_mem_id() topics on memory-less node (cpu-less node) Recently I see this kind of topics on list but I'm not sure whether I catch the issues/changes correctly.... Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org