Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Subject | Re: [PATCH -tip/core/rcu 2/6] Introduce cpu_notifier() to handle !HOTPLUG_CPU case | From | Josh Triplett <> | Date | Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:21:59 -0700 |
| |
On Sat, 2009-08-15 at 09:53 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > From: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > This patch introduces a new cpu_notifier() API that is similar to > hotcpu_notifier(), but which also notifies of CPUs coming online during > boot in the !HOTPLUG_CPU case. [...] > --- a/include/linux/cpu.h > +++ b/include/linux/cpu.h > @@ -48,6 +48,15 @@ struct notifier_block; > > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP > /* Need to know about CPUs going up/down? */ > +#if defined(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) || !defined(MODULE) > +#define cpu_notifier(fn, pri) { \ > + static struct notifier_block fn##_nb __cpuinitdata = \ > + { .notifier_call = fn, .priority = pri }; \ > + register_cpu_notifier(&fn##_nb); \ > +} > +#else /* #if defined(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) || !defined(MODULE) */ > +#define cpu_notifier(fn, pri) do { (void)(fn); } while (0) > +#endif /* #else #if defined(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) || !defined(MODULE) */
These two definitions seem inconsistent. I think the first one needs to change to use do { ... } while(0) as well, so it eats the subsequent semicolon.
Does this really want to live under defined(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU)? What happens when onlining CPUs during the !define(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) case? This seems somewhat inconsistent with the explanation in your commit message; can you clarify?
Also, why !defined(MODULE)?
- Josh Triplett
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |