Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 6 May 2003 15:04:11 +0530 | From | Ravikiran G Thirumalai <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] kmalloc_percpu |
| |
On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 06:03:15PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > In message <20030506050744.GA29352@in.ibm.com> you write: > .. > Doesn't break with sparce CPU #s, but yes, it is inefficient. >
If you don't reduce NR_CPUS with CONFIG_NR_CPUS, you waste space (32 bit folks won't like it) and if you say change CONFIG_NR_CPUS to 2, and we have cpuid 4 on a 2 way you break right? If we have to address these issues at all, why can't we use the simpler kmalloc_percpu patch which I posted in the morning and avoid so much complexity and arch dependency?
Thanks, Kiran
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |