Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 26 Apr 2005 19:46:50 +0200 (CEST) | From | Jesper Juhl <> | Subject | Re: preempt-count oddities - still looking for comments :) |
| |
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Robert Love wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 19:31 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > Replying to myself here since the initial mail got no response. Here's > > hoping that it showing up on the list again draws some comments :-) > > I didn't think it was that big of a deal. ;-) > It's not really that big of a deal. I was just currious if I'd gotten it right since I spend a good deal of time digging for possible reasons for the differences (and finding none). :-)
> It seems the right approach. Personally, I would of made the type an > s32, since fixed-sizes seems to be sensible in the thread_info > structure, but an int is the same thing. Cool with me. > I'll update the patch(es) then and use __s32 in the structure and s32 elsewhere.
> Acked-by: Robert Love <rml@novell.com> > Thanks.
> Robert Love >
-- Jesper Juhl
- 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/
| |