![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
> This patch should fix compilation issues in net/ipv6 subsystem > w/ rt patch. > > Signed-off-by: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/mcast.c b/net/ipv6/mcast.c > index f829a4a..15264f4 100644 > --- a/net/ipv6/mcast.c > +++ b/net/ipv6/mcast.c > @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ int ipv6_sock_mc_join(struct sock *sk, i > > mc_lst->ifindex = dev->ifindex; > mc_lst->sfmode = MCAST_EXCLUDE; > - mc_lst->sflock = RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED; > + mc_lst->sflock = RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED(mc_lst->sflock); > mc_lst->sflist = NULL; > > /* > diff --git a/net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c b/net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c > index c2c52af..bfd7a2b 100644 > --- a/net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c > +++ b/net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c > @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ struct nf_ct_frag6_queue > #define FRAG6Q_HASHSZ 64 > > static struct nf_ct_frag6_queue *nf_ct_frag6_hash[FRAG6Q_HASHSZ]; > -static rwlock_t nf_ct_frag6_lock = RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED; > +static rwlock_t nf_ct_frag6_lock = RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED(nf_ct_frag6_lock); > static u32 nf_ct_frag6_hash_rnd; > static LIST_HEAD(nf_ct_frag6_lru_list); > int nf_ct_frag6_nqueues = 0; > @@ -371,7 +371,7 @@ nf_ct_frag6_create(unsigned int hash, u3 > init_timer(&fq->timer); > fq->timer.function = nf_ct_frag6_expire; > fq->timer.data = (long) fq; > - fq->lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED; > + fq->lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(fq->lock); > atomic_set(&fq->refcnt, 1); > > return nf_ct_frag6_intern(hash, fq); > > -- Thanks and the patch worked fine, but I have a question about the patch submitted to the url... I created a new patch with the included ipv6 subsystem fix but I'm getting a smaller patch than what is posted on the website. $ wc -l patch-2.6.15-rt1 57869 patch-2.6.15-rt1 $ wc -l patch-2.6.15-rt1-1 57156 patch-2.6.15-rt1-1 patch-2.6.15-rt1-1 has the ipv6 patch yet is smaller than the initial patch. I created the patch using: $ diff -uprN linux-2.6.15 linux-2.6.15-rt1 > patch-2.6.15-rt1-1 Is this not the way you did it? I noticed different headers in my patch vs. the patch posted. Really I'm concerned about missing anything in the patch, considering it's 700+ lines smaller. - David Brown - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-01-04 08:18 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||