On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 13:42 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Using atomic (LOCKed on x86) bitops for certain of the operations on
> cpumask_t is overkill when the variables aren't concurrently accessible
> (e.g. local function variables, or due to explicit locking). Introduce
> alternatives using non-atomic bitops and use them where appropriate.
>
> Note that this
> - adds a volatile qualifier to cpumask_test_and_{clear,set}_cpu()
> (should have been there from the beginning, like is the case for
> cpumask_{clear,set}_cpu())
> - replaces several cpumask_clear()+cpumask_set_cpu(, n) pairs by the
> simpler cpumask_copy(, cpumask_of(n)) (or just cpumask_of(n) if we
> can do without copying)
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
> Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dun...@eu.citrix.com>
AIUI there is no need for any arm changes (you reuse the existing
__clear_bit etc), so:
Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com>
I suppose at some point we might want to switch xen/arch/arm to use the
relaxed ops where appropriate, but no need for you to worry about that.
Ian
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
