On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 12:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
> i'd not worry about those 160 bytes - getting this stuff to work fine is 
> far more important. Details around threading seem to be one of the 
> slowest converging technological details of Linux.

Okay, the next patch will have this simplification.

quoted text
> a silly question:
> 
> > +#else /* CONFIG_SMP */
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Allocate the thread_group_cputime structure appropriately for UP kernels
> > + * and fill in the current values of the fields.  Called from copy_signal()
> > + * via thread_group_cputime_clone_thread() when adding a second or subsequent
> > + * thread to a thread group.  Assumes interrupts are enabled when called.
> > + */
> > +int thread_group_cputime_alloc(struct task_struct *tsk)
> > +{
> 
> why is there _any_ assymetry needed between UP and SMP? These days we 
> just write straight code for SMP, and UP is just a single-CPU 
> special-case of it. _Sometimes_ if it's really worth it we do some UP 
> special cases but it's the exception, not the rule.

As far as I know, I still need to handle the SMP per_cpu allocate/free
differently from the UP kmalloc.  I'll check again, though; if that's no
longer the case, I'll fix it.
-- 
Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@google.com>
Google, Inc.

--
unsubscribe notice
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/