From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751974Ab1LSOJK (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:09:10 -0500 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:42986 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751229Ab1LSOJI convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:09:08 -0500 Message-ID: <1324303723.24621.1.camel@twins> Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the cputime tree From: Peter Zijlstra To: Martin Schwidefsky Cc: Ingo Molnar , Stephen Rothwell , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Glauber Costa Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 15:08:43 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20111219133151.4d14af80@de.ibm.com> References: <20111219154010.c2044c038a6174dd8fb6f477@canb.auug.org.au> <20111219080813.GB30432@elte.hu> <20111219101134.3c2c0db5@de.ibm.com> <20111219103513.GA17928@elte.hu> <20111219133151.4d14af80@de.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.1- Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 13:31 +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > Just one question: are you sure that you want the cpustat array > to be u64 instead of cputime64_t? The content of the cpustat array is defined > by the architecture semantics of cputime64_t, for CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING=y > this is not a jiffy counter. If the array is u64 we won't get the sparse > checking when reading from cpustat. So as Glauber said the reason was that we wanted to use simply operators, and IIRC he wanted to add a few fields that had to be u64. I'm not sure what the current plans are wrt adding more fields, but with your work cputime_t should again be a simple type and thus regular math operators should work again, right? Glauber, do you still need to add fields?