Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Define __raw_read_lock etc for uniprocessor builds | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Date | Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:32:02 +0100 |
| |
On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 13:29 -0500, Joe Korty wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 06:17:12PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 01:09:54PM -0500, Joe Korty wrote: > > > > > > Make NOPed versions of __raw_read_lock and family available > > > under uniprocessor kernels. > > > > > > Discovered when compiling a uniprocessor kernel with the > > > fusyn patch applied. > > > > > > The standard kernel does not use __raw_read_lock etc > > > outside of spinlock.c, which may account for this bug > > > being undiscovered until now. > > > > No one should call these directly. Please fix your odd patch instead. > > Actually the patch calls the _raw version which is #defined to the __raw > version. So it is doing the correct thing.
no it's not, it has no business calling the _raw version either.
- 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/
| |