Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755886AbZDKBic (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Apr 2009 21:38:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754991AbZDKBiP (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Apr 2009 21:38:15 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:41214 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755208AbZDKBiO (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Apr 2009 21:38:14 -0400 From: Rusty Russell To: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [GIT RFC] percpu: use dynamic percpu allocator as the default percpu allocator Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:08:06 +0930 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.2 (Linux/2.6.28-11-generic; KDE/4.2.2; i686; ; ) Cc: Ivan Kokshaysky , Martin Schwidefsky , Ingo Molnar , tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, Paul Mundt , rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, starvik@axis.com, ralf@linux-mips.org, davem@davemloft.net, cooloney@kernel.org, kyle@mcmartin.ca, matthew@wil.cx, grundler@parisc-linux.org, takata@linux-m32r.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, rth@twiddle.net, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com References: <49D3231D.2040403@kernel.org> <20090409094713.GA6538@jurassic.park.msu.ru> <49DDE1B5.4070407@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <49DDE1B5.4070407@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200904111108.08323.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1102 Lines: 27 On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 09:23:25 pm Tejun Heo wrote: > It's generally a good idea to use uniquely > distinguisible identifier for static symbols anyway to help debugging. Sorry, I can't let this statement stand. It's completely wrong: use the shortest clear name, always. > If this limitation is acceptable, I think we should also add the dup > build failure thing to the generic definition too tho so that such > cases can be discovered before they hit alpha and s390 later. > > Any objections? Yes. If we decide that static per-cpu is unsupportable, let's not hide the damn thing. We just make it give a compile warning if we can, patch out the current cases, and make checkpatch.pl warn on new ones. Don't silently override "static". Don't come up with stupid justifications. Accept with open-eyes that it's evil, just a lesser evil. Thanks, Rusty. -- 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/