On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 06:02:39PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Oct 2013 14:33:50 -0700
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
> > > > It's used to convert the calls to mcount to nops. But maybe a better
> > > > thing to do is to check if we only have a single CPU:
> > > >
> > > > static void run_sync(void)
> > > > {
> > > > if (num_online_cpus() != 1)
> > >
> > > Hmm, to be more robust to handle our future "ideal" machines, perhaps
> > > this should be:
> > >
> > > /* Ideally we would like to run on zero CPUS! */
> > > if (num_online_cpus() < 2)
> >
>
> Bah! And for such a simple computation, I got it wrong.
>
>
> /* Ideally we would like to run on zero CPUS! */
> if (num_online_cpus > 1)
>
> But I guess the question comes. If we are running on zero CPUS, should
> we perform the "on_each_cpu(do_sync_core, NULL, 1);" or not? Same goes
> with 5i-3 CPUS, or negative number CPUs. If we need to do on_each_cpu(),
> then I guess the != 1 will suffice.
Makes sense to me! Whoever adds the ability to run on zero, negative,
or complex numbers of CPUs can adjust on_each_cpu() accordingly.
Thanx, Paul
--
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/
