From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753391Ab3AFXmo (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jan 2013 18:42:44 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:55243 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753311Ab3AFXmj (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jan 2013 18:42:39 -0500 From: Rusty Russell To: Tejun Heo Cc: Li Zefan , paul@paulmenage.org, glommer@parallels.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, mhocko@suse.cz, bsingharora@gmail.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/13] cpuset: cleanup cpuset[_can]_attach() In-Reply-To: <20130103022911.GH11220@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <1354138460-19286-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1354138460-19286-7-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <50DACF5B.6050705@huawei.com> <20121226120415.GA18193@mtj.dyndns.org> <87zk0s5h7c.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20130102153439.GA11220@mtj.dyndns.org> <871ue35bzk.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20130103022911.GH11220@mtj.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.14 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 09:58:22 +1030 Message-ID: <87vcb951t5.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tejun Heo writes: > Hello, Rusty. > > On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:17:11AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> > So, I guess this currently is caught in a place which isn't here or >> > there. I'm pretty skeptical whether it makes sense to bother about >> > static usages tho. Can I keep them for static ones? >> >> I didn't realize that cpuset_attach was a fastpath. If it is, put a > > It isn't a hot path. It's just a bit nasty to have to allocate them > separately. > >> static there and I'll fix turn it into a bitmap when I need to. >> Otherwise, please don't change the code in the first place. > > So, the plan to drop cpumask_t is still on? If so, I'll leave > cpumask_var_t. Yep! Thanks, Rusty.