lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: recalc_sigpending() / recalc_sigpending_tsk() ?
Date

torvalds@transmeta.com said:
> Not a chance in hell. The backwards compatibility looks like a
> trivial one-liner:

> compat-2.4.h:
> #define recalc_sigpending() recalc_sigpending(current)

> so what are you complaining about?

It may be possible, but it's not a trivial one-liner. Am I missing
something obvious? Other than the fact that you don't care, of course.

background.c: In function `jffs2_garbage_collect_thread':
background.c:116: warning: implicit declaration of function `recalc_sigpending'

$ grep recalc_sigpending background.i
#define __ver_recalc_sigpending _ver_str(6682695c)
#define recalc_sigpending _set_ver(recalc_sigpending)
static inline void recalc_sigpending_Rsmp_6682695c(struct task_struct *t)
#define recalc_sigpending() recalc_sigpending(current)
recalc_sigpending(get_current());
recalc_sigpending(get_current());


I appreciate that the old recalc_sigpending(task) needed to stop working,
to force people to stop doing recalc_sigpending(current). How about
recalc_sigpending_cur() and recalc_sigpending_tsk() then?

--
dwmw2


-
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: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.065 / U:1.508 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site