Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752034Ab3HUCHs (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Aug 2013 22:07:48 -0400 Received: from mail-qa0-f50.google.com ([209.85.216.50]:36036 "EHLO mail-qa0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751883Ab3HUCHq (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Aug 2013 22:07:46 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 22:07:42 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Kent Overstreet Cc: Andrew Morton , "Nicholas A. Bellinger" , Christoph Lameter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov , Ingo Molnar , Andi Kleen , Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH] idr: Use this_cpu_ptr() for percpu_ida Message-ID: <20130821020742.GA3495@htj.dyndns.org> References: <1375896905-6074-1-git-send-email-kmo@daterainc.com> <1375896905-6074-5-git-send-email-kmo@daterainc.com> <0000014059ec4c34-1bb53d48-c9ee-4e71-81b8-253026431c5c-000000@email.amazonses.com> <20130807183345.GA11612@kmo-pixel> <000001405a4b39ef-0715410a-5061-41e9-9414-86559f16570d-000000@email.amazonses.com> <20130807195733.GB11612@kmo-pixel> <000001405e5776ba-bcc96088-b5e8-4abe-b98e-2e9d7d9b112b-000000@email.amazonses.com> <1377033546.32763.4.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> <20130820142956.1194d8c798abf53f884a1fb6@linux-foundation.org> <20130821020132.GA4051@kmo-pixel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130821020132.GA4051@kmo-pixel> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1032 Lines: 27 Hello, Kent. On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 07:01:32PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote: > I think Tejun and I might be at a bit of an impasse with the ida rewrite > itself, but I don't think there were any outstanding objections to the > percpu ida code itself - and this is a standalone version. The percpu ida code can be applied separately from the ida rewrite? > I was meaning to ask you Andrew, if you could take a look at the ida > discussion and lend your opinion - I don't think there's any _specific_ > technical objections left to my ida code, and it's now on a more > philisophical "complexity vs. ..." level. Hmmm... the objection was pretty specific - don't depend on high-order or vmalloc allocations when it can be easily avoided by using proper radix tree. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/