On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 2011-09-25 at 11:54 +0300, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote: >> This first version creates an on_each_cpu_mask infrastructure API > > But we already have the existing smp_call_function_many() doing that. I might be wrong but my understanding is that smp_call_function_many() does not invoke the IPI handler on the current processor. The original code I replaced uses on_each_cpu() which does, so I figured a wrapper was in order and then I discovered the same wrapper in arch specific code. > The on_each_cpu() thing is mostly a hysterical relic and could be > completely depricated Wont this require each caller to call smp_call_function_* and then check to see if it needs to also invoke the IPI handler locally ? I thought that was the reason for on_each_cpu existence... What have I missed? Thanks, Gilad -- Gilad Ben-Yossef Chief Coffee Drinker gilad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Israel Cell: +972-52-8260388 US Cell: +1-973-8260388 http://benyossef.com "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Goto statements used to implement co-routines. I watched C structures being stored in registers. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die. " -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>