From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
"linux-ia64\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/16] ia64: fix up obsolete cpu function usage.
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 13:14:26 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lhg9welh.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+8MBbLiSWmptfsWO8zmkquq7KsojThU7m7sLxhbwLX1co0YGw@mail.gmail.com>
Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
>
>> cpumask_test_cpu() doesn't take volatile, unlike the obsoleted
>> cpu_isset. The only place ia64 really cares is the spin waiting for a
>> bit; udelay() is probably a barrier but insert rmb() to be sure.
>
> Good to be sure ... but cpumask_test_cpu() simply calls test_bit() ...
> and 2 out of 3 versions of that function throw "volatile" back into the
> mix: :-)
Yep, volatile is hard to remove. But that seems like an argument for
removing the last user, not changing the interface...
The theory is that we're eschewing volatile, or so I thought.
Cheers,
Rusty.
> Global definition: test_bit
>
> File Line
> 0 include/asm/bitops.h 334 test_bit (int nr, const volatile
> void *addr)
> 1 asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h 103 static inline int test_bit(int
> nr, const volatile unsigned long *addr)
> 2 asm-generic/bitops/atomic.h 16 static __always_inline int
> test_bit(unsigned int nr, const unsigned long *addr)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-28 4:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-02 11:35 [PATCH 01/16] CONFIG_DISABLE_OBSOLETE_CPUMASK_FUNCTIONS: set if CPUMASK_OFFSTACK Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 11:35 ` [PATCH 02/16] cpumask: fix cpu-hotplug documentation Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 11:35 ` [PATCH 03/16] ia64: Use for_each_cpu_and() and cpumask_any_and() instead of temp var Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 11:35 ` [PATCH 04/16] drivers: fix up obsolete cpu function usage Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 22:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-03-02 11:35 ` [PATCH 05/16] staging/lustre: " Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 17:50 ` Oleg Drokin
2015-03-02 23:39 ` Rusty Russell
2015-03-03 1:16 ` Oleg Drokin
2015-03-03 3:12 ` Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 11:35 ` [PATCH 06/16] ia64: " Rusty Russell
2015-05-26 20:45 ` Tony Luck
2015-05-27 1:18 ` Rusty Russell
2015-05-27 17:37 ` Tony Luck
2015-05-28 3:44 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2015-03-02 11:35 ` [PATCH 07/16] um: " Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 11:35 ` [PATCH 08/16] x86: " Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 13:36 ` [tip:x86/cleanups] x86: Fix up obsolete __cpu_set() " tip-bot for Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 11:35 ` [PATCH 09/16] mips: fix up obsolete cpu " Rusty Russell
2015-03-02 12:34 ` [PATCH 01/16] CONFIG_DISABLE_OBSOLETE_CPUMASK_FUNCTIONS: set if CPUMASK_OFFSTACK Paul Bolle
2015-03-02 23:40 ` Rusty Russell
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=87lhg9welh.fsf@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@gmail.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome