From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1KT8E9-0005es-Ia for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:44:54 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3 1/7] kexec jump: clean up #ifdef and comments From: Huang Ying In-Reply-To: <20080812204900.db63deaa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1218510861.24951.40.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> <20080812204900.db63deaa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:44:49 +0800 Message-Id: <1218602689.24951.89.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: kexec-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net, Kexec Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Eric W. Biederman" , Pavel Machek , mingo@elte.hu, Linus Torvalds , Vivek Goyal On Tue, 2008-08-12 at 20:49 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:14:21 +0800 Huang Ying wrote: > > > xchg(&kexec_lock, 0); > > kernel/kexec.c: In function 'kernel_kexec': > kernel/kexec.c:1501: warning: value computed is not used > > Is there any reason why we cannot use the more conventional > test_and_set_bit() etc, rather than this peculiarity? > > Or perhaps spin_trylock? Hi, Andrew, I think it is of no problem to replace xchg() with test_and_set_bit() or spin_trylock(). Hi, Eric, Do you have some reason to use xchg() instead of others? Best Regards, Huang Ying _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752883AbYHMEpC (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:45:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751027AbYHMEox (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:44:53 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:58708 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750810AbYHMEox (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:44:53 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,199,1217833200"; d="scan'208";a="325764341" Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3 1/7] kexec jump: clean up #ifdef and comments From: Huang Ying To: Andrew Morton Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , Pavel Machek , nigel@nigel.suspend2.net, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Vivek Goyal , mingo@elte.hu, Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kexec Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20080812204900.db63deaa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1218510861.24951.40.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> <20080812204900.db63deaa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:44:49 +0800 Message-Id: <1218602689.24951.89.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2008-08-12 at 20:49 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:14:21 +0800 Huang Ying wrote: > > > xchg(&kexec_lock, 0); > > kernel/kexec.c: In function 'kernel_kexec': > kernel/kexec.c:1501: warning: value computed is not used > > Is there any reason why we cannot use the more conventional > test_and_set_bit() etc, rather than this peculiarity? > > Or perhaps spin_trylock? Hi, Andrew, I think it is of no problem to replace xchg() with test_and_set_bit() or spin_trylock(). Hi, Eric, Do you have some reason to use xchg() instead of others? Best Regards, Huang Ying