[lkml]   [2002]   [Aug]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [BKPATCH] Read-Copy Update 2.5
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 11:11:57PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> I think it gets both static and non-static wrong.

Is this problem specific to certain versions of 2.95 gcc ?

For "static DEFINE_PER_CPU(atomic_t, fake_struct);", I get this
with gcc 2.95.4 -

.section .percpu
.align 4
.type fake_struct__per_cpu,@object
.size fake_struct__per_cpu,4
.zero 4
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 2.95.4 20011002 (Debian prerelease)"

It seems to be in .percpu section. I can't go back to the gcc that gave
us problems at the moment.

> Why don't we just specify that DEFINE_PER_CPU()'s must
> have explicit initializers then we never need to think
> about this ever again.

Like DEFINE_PER_CPU(type, var, initializer) ?
For now, I will remain paranoic and keep the initializers.

Dipankar Sarma <>
Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.039 / U:1.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site