On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:03:45 +1000
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 10:44 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > The two variants are just cleaner versions of the two variants you
> > already introduced.
> >
> > static inline bool mm_activate_cpu(struct mm_struct *mm)
> > {
> > if (!cpumask_test_cpu(smp_processor_id(), mm_cpumask(next))) {
> > cpumask_set_cpu(smp_processor_id(), mm_cpumask(next));
> > #if CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64
> > atomic_inc(&mm->context.active_cpus);
> > #endif
> > smp_mb();
> > return true;
> > }
> > return false;
> > }
>
> Well the above is what I originally wrote, which Michael encouraged me
> to turn into a helper ;-) I was removing ifdef's from switch_mm in
> this series...
Well I won't harp on about it if you guys prefer the increment helper.
Just the comment would be good. The rest of the series seems okay to
me.
Thanks,
Nick
