mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Kevin Winchester <kjwinchester@gmail.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
	Nick Bowler <nbowler@elliptictech.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_llc_shared_map to a field in struct cpuinfo_x86
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 10:32:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120507083238.GJ16608@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAELBVzCzqZMbmGzE-dNgXogh95SNdvYWE5tHAxy1OYa+kknsCw@mail.gmail.com>


* Kevin Winchester <kjwinchester@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 29 April 2012 20:37, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> > On 04/29/2012 04:33 PM, Kevin Winchester wrote:
> >> Commit 141168c36cde ("x86: Simplify code by removing a !SMP #ifdefs from
> >> 'struct cpuinfo_x86'") caused the compilation error:
> >>
> >> mce_amd.c:(.cpuinit.text+0x4723): undefined reference to 'cpu_llc_shared_map'
> >>
> >> by removing an #ifdef CONFIG_SMP around a block containing a reference
> >> to cpu_llc_shared_map.  Rather than replace the #ifdef, move
> >> cpu_llc_shared_map to be a new cpumask_t field llc_shared_map in
> >> struct cpuinfo_x86 and adjust all references to cpu_llc_shared_map.
> >>
> >
> > Okay...  I must not get this.
> >
> > Why is this better than just moving the DEFINE_PER_CPU to a place which
> > isn't dependent on SMP?
> >
> 
> To be honest, the idea was suggested by Ingo a while back, and 
> I just volunteered to implement it.  I believe the idea was to 
> work towards gathering all CPU-specific data for SMP and !SMP 
> into one place.  That said, moving the DEFINE_PER_CPU 
> elsewhere would likely still give the same benefits as my 
> patch in terms of ifdef reduction.  I cannot really see a 
> benefit/downside either way, really.
> 
> Perhaps Ingo will chime in, and you and he (and anyone else 
> with an opinion) can figure out the best way of accomplishing 
> this simplification, and then I can adjust my series 
> accordingly.

Well, cpu_llc_shared_map is really a CPU attribute and as such I 
think the logical place for it is "struct cpuinfo_x86". Peter, 
any objections to that?

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2012-05-07  8:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-02-23 23:57 [PATCH v4 0/5] x86: Cleanup and simplify cpu-specific data Kevin Winchester
2012-02-23 23:57 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_llc_shared_map to a field in struct cpuinfo_x86 Kevin Winchester
2012-02-23 23:57 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_llc_id " Kevin Winchester
2012-02-23 23:57 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_sibling_map " Kevin Winchester
2012-02-23 23:57 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_core_map " Kevin Winchester
2012-02-23 23:57 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] x86: Remove #ifdef CONFIG_SMP sections by moving smp_num_siblings into common.c Kevin Winchester
2012-02-24 11:47 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] x86: Cleanup and simplify cpu-specific data Borislav Petkov
2012-02-24 12:22   ` Kevin Winchester
2012-02-24 12:30     ` Borislav Petkov
2012-02-27 11:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-02-28  0:52   ` Kevin Winchester
2012-02-28  3:43     ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-02-28  8:24       ` Ingo Molnar
2012-02-28  8:31         ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-03-01 13:06           ` Kevin Winchester
2012-03-01 13:45             ` Ingo Molnar
2012-03-28 22:43   ` [PATCH v5 " Kevin Winchester
2012-03-28 22:43     ` [PATCH v5 1/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_llc_shared_map to a field in struct cpuinfo_x86 Kevin Winchester
2012-03-28 22:43     ` [PATCH v5 2/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_llc_id " Kevin Winchester
2012-03-28 22:43     ` [PATCH v5 3/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_sibling_map " Kevin Winchester
2012-03-28 22:43     ` [PATCH v5 4/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_core_map " Kevin Winchester
2012-03-28 22:43     ` [PATCH v5 5/5] x86: Remove #ifdef CONFIG_SMP sections by moving smp_num_siblings into common.c Kevin Winchester
2012-04-26 18:09     ` [PATCH v5 0/5] x86: Cleanup and simplify cpu-specific data Kevin Winchester
2012-04-26 19:48     ` H. Peter Anvin
     [not found]       ` <CAELBVzAi_yndZbDc0TkXhbqzn2wULpnsFMA_dop=Uvaii8tkqg@mail.gmail.com>
2012-04-26 21:21         ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-04-27 23:37           ` Kevin Winchester
2012-04-29 12:47             ` Borislav Petkov
2012-04-29 22:55               ` Kevin Winchester
2012-04-29 23:33           ` [PATCH v6 " Kevin Winchester
2012-04-29 23:33             ` [PATCH v6 1/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_llc_shared_map to a field in struct cpuinfo_x86 Kevin Winchester
2012-04-29 23:37               ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-04-30 15:05                 ` Kevin Winchester
2012-05-07  8:32                   ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2012-04-29 23:33             ` [PATCH v6 2/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_llc_id " Kevin Winchester
2012-04-29 23:33             ` [PATCH v6 3/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_sibling_map " Kevin Winchester
2012-04-29 23:33             ` [PATCH v6 4/5] x86: Move per cpu cpu_core_map " Kevin Winchester
2012-04-29 23:33             ` [PATCH v6 5/5] x86: Remove #ifdef CONFIG_SMP sections by moving smp_num_siblings into common.c Kevin Winchester

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120507083238.GJ16608@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=kjwinchester@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=nbowler@elliptictech.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®