Re: [GIT RFC] percpu: use dynamic percpu allocator as the defaultpercpu allocator

[Tejun Heo]

Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Martin.
> 
> Sorry about the delay.
> 
> Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
>> We do have a problem with #2, the dynamic percpu patches currently
>> breaks s390. But the nice thing is that we can now get rid of the GOTENT
>> relocation for the percpu symbols. If the code is changed to use
>> RELOC_HIDE for the SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR define, everything works just fine.
>> Patch attached. Nice works guys.
>>
>> Subject: [PATCH] s390: percpu access.
>>
>> From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> With the dynamic percpu allocator there is no need anymore to play
>> tricks with the GOTENT relocation for the access to the percpu
>> symbols. A simple RELOC_HIDE gets the job done.
> 
> Hmm... I don't quite get it.  The GOTENT was to work around large
> offsets for modules, right?  Can you please explain what changed by
> the dynamic percpu allocator?
> 
>> +#define SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR(var, offset) RELOC_HIDE(&per_cpu_var(var), (offset))
> 
> Hmm... @var already has per_cpu__ prefix when the above macro is
> invoked, so doing per_cpu_var() on it again wouldn't work.  If simple
> RELOC_HIDE works, you should be able to simply drop the above
> definition.  The generic percpu.h will define it.

Ping.

-- 
tejun
--
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/