Oh, it can be. I wasn't going to require something from all archs for
this one case (well, it was more like zero cases when I first did the
patch).
> and then add a few simple operations like
>
> cpumask_and(cpu_mask_t * res, cpu_mask_t *a, cpu_mask_t *b);
Sure... or just make all archs supply a "cpus_online_of(mask)" which
does that, unless there are other interesting cases. Or we can go the
other way and have a general "and_region(void *res, void *a, void *b,
int len)". Which one do you want?
> This is not rocket science, and I find it ridiculous that you claim to
> worry about scaling up to thousands of CPU's, and then you try to send me
> absolute crap like the above which clearly is unacceptable for lots of
> CPU's.
Spinning 1000 times doesn't phase me until someone complains.
Breaking userspace code does. One can be fixed if it proves to be a
bottleneck. Understand?
Rusty.
-- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/