Re: [PATCH] another minor bit of cpumask cleanup

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 06:00:44PM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Looking further, I see this macro is never used, and its subordinate
> inline macro next_online_cpu() used no where else.  What's more, it's
> redundant.  Calling it with a map of "cpu_online_map" (which you have to
> do, given it's broken thus) is just as good as calling the macro right
> above, "for_each_cpu()", with that same "cpu_online_map". Indeed the
> only uses of "for_each_cpu()", in arch/i386/mach-voyager/voyager_smp.c,
> do pass "cpu_online_map" explicitly, in 5 of 6 calls there from.

Callers couldn't be converted without risking a "cleanup factor". It's
not terribly surprising some issue might appear since it wasn't used.

I don't honestly care if it lives or dies; it appeared to make more
sense as a generic macro than a voyager-specific macro at the time.


-- wli
-
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/