Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] smp: Introduce a generic on_each_cpu_mask function

[Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>]

2012/1/3 Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>:
> On Mon, 02 Jan 2012 11:24:12 +0100, Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> @@ -102,6 +102,13 @@ static inline void call_function_init(void) { }
>>  int on_each_cpu(smp_call_func_t func, void *info, int wait);
>> /*
>> + * Call a function on processors specified by mask, which might include
>> + * the local one.
>> + */
>> +void on_each_cpu_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, void (*func)(void *),
>> +               void *info, bool wait);
>> +
>
>
> on_each_cpu() returns an int.  For consistency reasons, would it make sense
> to
> make on_each_cpu_maks() to return and int?  I know that the difference is
> that
> smp_call_function() returns and int and smp_call_function_many() returns
> void,
> but to me it actually seems strange and either I'm missing something
> important
> (which is likely) or this needs to get cleaned up at one point as well.
>

I'd say we should go the other way around - kill the return value on
on_each_cpu()

The return value is always a hard coded zero and we have some code that tests
for that return value. Silly...

It looks like it's there for hysterical reasons to me :-)

Gilad



-- 
Gilad Ben-Yossef
Chief Coffee Drinker
gilad@benyossef.com
Israel Cell: +972-52-8260388
US Cell: +1-973-8260388
http://benyossef.com

"Unfortunately, cache misses are an equal opportunity pain provider."
-- Mike Galbraith, LKML

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>