From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net,
Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
mingo@elte.hu, Linus, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3 1/7] kexec jump: clean up #ifdef and comments
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:49:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080812204900.db63deaa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1218510861.24951.40.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:14:21 +0800 Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> 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?
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
nigel@nigel.suspend2.net, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
mingo@elte.hu, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3 1/7] kexec jump: clean up #ifdef and comments
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:49:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080812204900.db63deaa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1218510861.24951.40.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:14:21 +0800 Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> 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?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-13 3:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-12 3:14 [PATCH -v3 1/7] kexec jump: clean up #ifdef and comments Huang Ying
2008-08-12 3:14 ` Huang Ying
2008-08-13 3:49 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-08-13 3:49 ` Andrew Morton
2008-08-13 4:44 ` Huang Ying
2008-08-13 4:44 ` Huang Ying
2008-08-13 4:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-13 4:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080812204900.db63deaa.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nigel@nigel.suspend2.net \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.