[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] generic-hardirqs.patch, 2.6.9-rc1-bk14
    On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, William Lee Irwin III wrote:

    > * Christoph Hellwig <> wrote:
    > >> And make hardirq.o dependent on some symbols the architectures set.
    > >> Else arches that don't use it carry tons of useless baggage around
    > >> (and in fact I'm pretty sure it wouldn't even compie for many)
    > On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 02:45:47PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > > it compiles fine on x86, x64, ppc and ppc64. Why do you think it wont
    > > compile on others?
    > > wrt. unused generic functions - why dont we drop them link-time?
    > It may be time for a __weak define to abbreviate __attribute__((weak));
    > we seem to use it in enough places.

    Hmm, whenever i've brought up weak functions in a patch it's never well
    received. Frankly i prefer it to littering the architectures with similar


    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 14:06    [W:0.023 / U:25.884 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site