[PATCH 1/2] Add thread_info_cache_init() to all archs
Benjamin Herrenschmidt
benh at ozlabs.org
Mon Apr 14 10:38:26 EST 2008
> > +#ifndef thread_info_cache_init
> > +#define thread_info_cache_init do { } while(0)
> > +#endif
>
> This trick does cause a bit of a problem: it is undefined which arch header
> file is to provide the alternative definition of thread_info_cache_init.
I this case it's well defined: thread_info.h. Maybe I should add a
comment ?
> So we can (and have) ended up in the situation where the override appears
> in different files on different architectures and various screwups ensue.
Yup.
> So I'd suggest that we have a bigfatcomment telling implementors which file
> the override should be implemented in. And make sure that this arch file is
> directly included from within sched.h.
Will do.
> I have a suspicion that we can still get in a mess if .c files include the
> per-arch file and don't include sched.h, but I forget where this happened
> and why it broke stuff.
In this case, there's only one call site and will only every be one, so
that shouldn't be a problem. I don't see init/main.c not including
sched.h
> Sigh. A nice, coded-in-C implementation within each and every architecture
> remains the best implementation, and all the little tricks-to-save-typing
> have failure modes.
Well, I started doing it in all arch, and people around here told me
that was not a good idea , that it would be trouble if the prototype
ever had to change (adding an arg, etc... though very unlikely to happen
in that case, granted).
> otoh, if only one .c file will ever call this function then I think that
> all problems are solved by
>
> a) moving the above ifdeffery into the .c file
> b) adding a comment explaining which arch file must provide the override
> c) directly including that file from within the .c file.
I can definitely do that. I have no problem either way. I can add to all
archs too, it's just that whatever way I choose, some people won't be
happy with it :-)
Anyway, I'll move the ifdeferry to init/main.c then.
Cheers,
Ben.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list