On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 03:24:23PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Partially agree. Removing all args might be worthwhile. But all these
> softirqs use the "cpu" arg to access per-cpu data, which should be
> changed to use the per_cpu_data mechanism anyway, which removes the
> point of the arg.
I see. That makes a lot of sense.
> Things haven't been changed over because I haven't pushed the per-cpu
> interface changes (required for some archs 8() to Linus yet. But you'll
> want them so we can save space (you only need allocate per-cpu data for
> cpus where cpu_possible(i) is true).
So what we want is something more like:
struct softnet_data softnet_data __per_cpu_data = { NULL };
static void void net_tx_action(void *arg)
{
struct softnet_data *data = arg;
if (arg->completion_queue) {
...
}
open_softirq(NET_TX_SOFTIRQ, net_tx_action, softnet_data);
and have kernel/softirq.c do:
do {
if (pending & 1)
h->action(this_cpu(h->data));
h++;
pending >>= 1;
} while (pending);
right?
-- Revolutions do not require corporate support. - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 07 2002 - 22:00:36 EST