Re: [PATCH 2/5] Fix mismatched variable in rcutree_trace.c

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 12:42:17AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > rcutree.c defines rcu_cpu_kthread_cpu as int, not unsigned int,
> > so the extern has to follow that.
> > 
> > Cc: paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  kernel/rcutree_trace.c |    2 +-
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcutree_trace.c b/kernel/rcutree_trace.c
> > index 9678cc3..91c56e5 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcutree_trace.c
> > +++ b/kernel/rcutree_trace.c
> > @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@
> >  #include "rcutree.h"
> >  
> >  DECLARE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, rcu_cpu_kthread_status);
> > -DECLARE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, rcu_cpu_kthread_cpu);
> > +DECLARE_PER_CPU(int, rcu_cpu_kthread_cpu);
> 
> Can we rather fix the DEFINE to use unsigned int. Signed cpu numbers
> are pointless in that context, right ?

Hmmm...  Some arches have signed CPU numbers while others have unsigned
CPU numbers.  I do use "-1" to mean "no CPU" in some cases (for example,
in rcu_node_kthread_setaffinity()), so I guess for consistency I should
be using "int" everywhere.

So, any plans for systems with 2,147,483,648 CPUs?  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

> >  DECLARE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, rcu_cpu_kthread_loops);
> >  DECLARE_PER_CPU(char, rcu_cpu_has_work);
> >  
> > -- 
> > 1.7.4.4
> > 
> > --
> > 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/
> > 
--
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/