Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Feb 2011 11:43:43 -0500 | From | Mathieu Desnoyers <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates |
| |
* Peter Zijlstra (peterz@infradead.org) wrote: > On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 11:29 -0500, Jason Baron wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 05:25:54PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > > > I remember that atomic_t is defined in types.h now rather than atomic.h. > > > > Any reason why you should keep including atomic.h from jump_label.h ? > > > > > > Ooh, shiny.. we could probably move the few atomic_{read,inc,dec} users > > > in jump_label.h into out of line functions and have this sorted. > > > > > > > inc and dec sure, but atomic_read() for the disabled case needs to be > > inline.... > > D'0h yes of course, I was thinking about jump_label_enabled(), but > there's still the static_branch() implementation to consider. > > We could of course cheat implement our own version of atomic_read() in > order to avoid the whole header mess, but that's not pretty at all >
OK, so the other way around then : why does kernel.h need to include dynamic_debug.h (which includes jump_label.h) ?
Mathieu
-- Mathieu Desnoyers Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
| |