From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 02:35:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 02:35:23 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:1038 "HELO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 02:35:19 -0500 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 08:35:11 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Rusty Russell Cc: Andi Kleen , davidm@hpl.hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rth@twiddle.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.5.1-pre5: per-cpu areas Message-ID: <20020318083511.A19810@wotan.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20020314195122.A30566@wotan.suse.de> <20020315101309.A13609@wotan.suse.de> <20020317181732.48f85421.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 06:17:32PM +1100, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:13:09 +0100 > Andi Kleen wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 03:07:27PM +1100, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > They must return an lvalue, otherwise they're useless for 50% of cases > > > (ie. assignment). x86_64 can still use its own mechanism for > > > arch-specific per-cpu data, of course. > > > > Assignment should use an own macro (set_this_cpu()) or use per_cpu(). > > So, we'd have "get_this_cpu(x)" and "set_this_cpu(x, y)". So far, so good. > > struct myinfo > { > int x; > int y; > }; > > static struct myinfo mystuff __per_cpu_data; > > Now how do we set mystuff.x on this CPU? set_this_cpu(mystuff.x, y) could be eventually supported properly, it just needs compiler work (and before that can use address calculation & reference) &this_cpu(mystuff, y) will always be slow. -Andi