Re: [rfc git pull] cpus4096 fixes, take 2

[Rusty Russell]

On Tuesday 29 July 2008 06:57:00 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> +/*
> + * In cases where we take the address of the cpumask immediately,
> + * gcc optimizes it out (it's a constant) and there's no huge stack
> + * variable created:
> + */
> +#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) ({ *get_cpu_mask(cpu); })

Why use a statement expression here?  Isn't (*get_cpu_mask(cpu)) sufficient?

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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/