Re: [PATCH] Introduce nodemask_t ADT [0/7]

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 05:21:34PM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Providing the additional mask "instructions" shouldn't create any quagmire.
> It's the using of them that is intrusive.
> Initially, some intrusive work, such as you (Bill) did was needed to get
> masks implanted.  But now it should be appropriate to simply provide the
> alternative calls that can make certain code sequences more efficient,
> and then if someone complains that their old code sequence is too slow
> or uses too much stack, we can recommend alternative code sequences that
> will work better for them.
> Passing the buck, division of labour and all that ...

Higher-level constructs that improve runtime efficiency may also be
good cleanups that can sometimes fix bugs and/or generally consolidate
code. e.g. cpus_subset(x, y). I think those kinds of things should be
perfectly mergeable.


-- 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/