Hello, On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 04:33:28PM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > Ok I tried to change it to an inline function. The problem is the > cpumask.h is included very early. this_cpu ops require functionality > that is not available at that point. I think it cannot be more than a > macro unless we define it elsewhere.
Ugh.... include hell. :( Does putting the accessors in percpu.h make any difference? Given the tricky nature of cpumask_var_t, I think type checking can be pretty useful. > Regarding naming: > > this_cpu_ptr_cpumask_var() > > is ok? Wouldn't this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr() be a bit more natural? Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/
