From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9318C6B004F for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2009 07:36:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4A23BD20.5030500@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 20:36:00 +0900 From: Tejun Heo MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] percpu: clean up percpu variable definitions References: <1243846708-805-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1243846708-805-4-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20090601.024006.98975069.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20090601.024006.98975069.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: David Miller Cc: JBeulich@novell.com, andi@firstfloor.org, mingo@elte.hu, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru, rth@twiddle.net, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, hskinnemoen@atmel.com, cooloney@kernel.org, starvik@axis.com, jesper.nilsson@axis.com, dhowells@redhat.com, ysato@users.sourceforge.jp, tony.luck@intel.com, takata@linux-m32r.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, monstr@monstr.eu, ralf@linux-mips.org, kyle@mcmartin.ca, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, lethal@linux-sh.org, jdike@addtoit.com, chris@zankel.net, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, jens.axboe@oracle.com, davej@redhat.com, jeremy@xensource.com, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: David Miller wrote: > From: Tejun Heo > Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 17:58:24 +0900 > >> --- a/arch/cris/include/asm/mmu_context.h >> +++ b/arch/cris/include/asm/mmu_context.h >> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ extern void switch_mm(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next, >> * registers like cr3 on the i386 >> */ >> >> -extern volatile DEFINE_PER_CPU(pgd_t *,current_pgd); /* defined in arch/cris/mm/fault.c */ >> +DECLARE_PER_CPU(pgd_t *,current_pgd); /* defined in arch/cris/mm/fault.c */ >> >> static inline void enter_lazy_tlb(struct mm_struct *mm, struct task_struct *tsk) >> { > > Yes volatile sucks, but might this break something? > > Whether the volatile is actually needed or not, it's bad to have this > kind of potential behavior changing nugget hidden in this seemingly > inocuous change. Especially if you're the poor soul who ends up > having to debug it :-/ You're right. Aieee... how do I feed volatile to the DEFINE macro. I'll think of something. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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