On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 17:46 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On 03/05/2010 02:07 AM, Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > > To use the generic percpu infrastructure for the numa_node_id() interface, > > defined in linux/topology.h, we need to break the circular header dependency > > that results from including <linux/percpu.h> in <linux/topology.h>. The > > circular dependency: > > > > percpu.h -> slab.h -> gfp.h -> topology.h > > > > percpu.h includes slab.h to obtain the definition of kzalloc()/kfree() for > > inlining __alloc_percpu() and free_percpu() in !SMP configurations. One could > > un-inline these functions in the !SMP case, but a large number of files depend > > on percpu.h to include slab.h. Tejun Heo suggested moving the definitions to > > percpu-defs.h and requested that this be separated from the remainder of the > > generic percpu numa_node_id() preparation patch. > > Hmmm... I think uninlining !SMP case would be much cleaner. Sorry > that you had to do it twice. I'll break the dependency in the percpu > devel branch and let you know. OK, I'll do that for V4. It'll be one big ugly patch because of all the dependencies. But, it's really just a mechanical change. > > For other patches, except for what Christoph has already pointed out, > everything looks good to me. > > Thank you. > Thank you for the review. Regards, Lee -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>