On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:21:03PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > I'm not sure about the name through, I like mentioning sw coordination in it > > because that's the comment in the declaration: > > > > cpumask_var_t cpus; /* CPUs requiring sw coordination */ > > cpumask_var_t related_cpus; /* CPUs with any coordination > > */ > > > > And those two are already confusing as a starting point. > > I will fix these comments with a patch of mine.
Great! > > > Anyway, this sounds fine to me. If you think this is useful I can send > > a patch, or feel free to include it in your patches if you plan to do > > further cleanup work on this code. > > > > /me tries to also keep that ->cpu field in mind. > > You can make it part of your patchsets v8. I'm not sending a v8 as Rafael already asked for incremental, but I'll send a patch with that soon. Thanks, Fabio -- Fabio Baltieri -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
