Re: [PATCH] cpumask 5/10 rewrite cpumask.h - single bitmap basedimplementation

[Nick Piggin]

Rusty Russell wrote:

> We've discussed this before when talking about whether it'd be easier to
> just make people use raw bitop functions directly, so I know we have
> philosophical differences here.
>
> So, opinion alert: if I were doing this, I'd probably live without this
> macro; in my mind it crosses the "too much abstraction" line.  I did
> momentarily wonder what this macro did when I saw it used in the
> succeeding patches.

I think if you don't like that abstraction, there should be no
cpumask type at all, just use the bitmap.

I don't see what you gain from having the cpumask type but having
to get at its internals with the bitop functions.


> But it's a minor nit; thanks for doing these.

Yeah it looks quite good
-
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/