Re: [PATCH][2.6.7-rc3-mm1] perfctr cpumask cleanup

From: Paul Jackson
Date: Wed Jun 09 2004 - 17:57:28 EST


Or ... pushing the point further ... one _could_ remove the old_mask as
well. However I think this makes the code less clear, even if it does
save a stack copy of a cpumask_t. So I'm of mixed feelings on this
patch, edging slightly toward negative. Same utter lack of testing as
the previous patch.

Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx>

Index: 2.6.7-rc3-mm1/drivers/perfctr/virtual.c
===================================================================
--- 2.6.7-rc3-mm1.orig/drivers/perfctr/virtual.c 2004-06-09 15:38:32.000000000 -0700
+++ 2.6.7-rc3-mm1/drivers/perfctr/virtual.c 2004-06-09 15:53:06.000000000 -0700
@@ -403,14 +403,14 @@
return -EFAULT;

if (control.cpu_control.nractrs || control.cpu_control.nrictrs) {
- cpumask_t old_mask, new_mask;
+ cpumask_t new_mask;

- old_mask = tsk->cpus_allowed;
- cpus_andnot(new_mask, old_mask, perfctr_cpus_forbidden_mask);
+ cpus_andnot(new_mask, tsk->cpus_allowed,
+ perfctr_cpus_forbidden_mask);

if (cpus_empty(new_mask))
return -EINVAL;
- if (!cpus_equal(new_mask, old_mask))
+ if (!cpus_equal(tsk->cpus_allowed, new_mask))
set_cpus_allowed(tsk, new_mask);
}



--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> 1.650.933.1373
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/