Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:29:26 -0400 | From | Waiman Long <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 05/19] qspinlock: Optimize for smaller NR_CPUS |
| |
On 04/17/2014 11:50 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:03:57AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >> +#if !defined(__LITTLE_ENDIAN)&& !defined(__BIG_ENDIAN) >> +#error "Missing either LITTLE_ENDIAN or BIG_ENDIAN definition." >> +#endif > This seems entirely superfluous, I don't think a kernel build will go > anywhere if either is missing.
Yes, I am on the conservative side when I add that. I can certainly take it out if you think that is not needed.
-Longman
| |