From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270684AbTGUSlX (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jul 2003 14:41:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270685AbTGUSlX (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jul 2003 14:41:23 -0400 Received: from mail.jlokier.co.uk ([81.29.64.88]:32920 "EHLO mail.jlokier.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270684AbTGUSlX (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jul 2003 14:41:23 -0400 Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 19:56:19 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier To: Rusty Russell Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, akpm@zip.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] percpu struct members. Message-ID: <20030721185619.GB6912@mail.jlokier.co.uk> References: <20030716083750.6DC4A2C141@lists.samba.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030716083750.6DC4A2C141@lists.samba.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Rusty Russell wrote: > The current percpu macros do not allow __get_cpu_var(foo.val1) > which makes building macros on top of them really difficult. What's the problem with __get_cpu_var(foo).val1 ? -- Jamie