- To: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] Remove useless on_each_cpu return value
- From: Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 18:08:33 +0200
- Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, David Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxx>, dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx>, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rob Herring <rob.herring@xxxxxxxxxxx>, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, devicetree-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Richard Henderson <rth@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Matt Turner <mattst88@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, Tony Luck <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <op.v7iidbwz3l0zgt@mpn-glaptop>
2012/1/3 Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 15:19:04 +0100, Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>
>> on_each_cpu() returns as its own return value the return value of
>> smp_call_function(). smp_call_function() in turn returns a hard
>> coded value of zero.
>>
>> Some callers to on_each_cpu() waste cycles and bloat code space
>> by checking the return value to on_each_cpu(), probably for
>> historical reasons.
>>
>> This patch set refactors callers to not test on_each_cpu()
>> (fixed) return value and then refactors on_each_cpu to
>> return void to avoid confusing future users.
>>
>> In other words, this patch aims to delete 18 source code lines
>> while not changing any functionality :-)
>>
>> I tested as best as I could the x86 changes and compiled some
>> of the others, but I don't have access to all the needed hardware
>> for testing. Reviewers and testers welcome!
>
>
> Other then the lack of Signed-off-by in the patches, looks good to me,
Blimey! I'll resend with a proper Signed-off-by after more people have
a chance to
comment. And thanks for the review.
> even though personally I'd choose a bottom-up approach, ie. make
> smp_call_function() return void and from that conclude that
> on_each_cpu() can return void. With those patches, we have a situation,
> where smp_call_function() has a return value which is then lost for no
> immediately apparent reason lost in on_each_cpu().
There are so many call site of smp_call_function() that do not check the
return value right now that I think we can tolerate it for just a
little bit longer
until that get fixed as well... :-)
Thanks,
Gilad
--
Gilad Ben-Yossef
Chief Coffee Drinker
gilad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Israel Cell: +972-52-8260388
US Cell: +1-973-8260388
http://benyossef.com
"Unfortunately, cache misses are an equal opportunity pain provider."
-- Mike Galbraith, LKML
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-alpha" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Netdev]
[Linux Wireless]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Security]
[Linux for Hams]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Yosemite]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux RAID]
[Linux Admin]
[Samba]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux Resources]