Hello, Lai. On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 02:41:24AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > In __next_wq_cpu() for_each_*wq_cpu(), the name WORK_CPU_LAST > is proper than WORK_CPU_NONE, convert them to WORK_CPU_LAST. > > WORK_CPU_NONE is not used any more, just remove it. ... > #define for_each_wq_cpu(cpu) \ > for ((cpu) = __next_wq_cpu(-1, cpu_possible_mask, 3); \ > - (cpu) < WORK_CPU_NONE; \ > + (cpu) < WORK_CPU_LAST; \ > (cpu) = __next_wq_cpu((cpu), cpu_possible_mask, 3))
LAST implies that it's the last element of the range and thus that it's an inclusive range. Maybe we should rename it to WORK_CPU_END? Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
