From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arkadiusz Miskiewicz Subject: Re: [ACPI] Re: Linux 2.4.26-rc1 (cmpxchg vs 80386 build) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 22:25:33 +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <200403302225.33966.arekm@pld-linux.org> References: <200403302030.26476.arekm@pld-linux.org> <1080677134.980.166.camel@dhcppc4> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1080677134.980.166.camel@dhcppc4> Content-Disposition: inline To: Len Brown Cc: Alan Cox , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Developers List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Dnia Tuesday 30 of March 2004 22:05, Len Brown napisa=B3: > I can make sure that ACPI checks implicitly or explicitly > that CMPXCHG is available -- but I can't make sure that > some other random part of the kernel which may not have > been written yet does. So I'd rather that they not build, > like ACPI didn't. Well, I asked for this because there is similar case with some DRI driv= ers in=20 kernel. These drivers use cmpxchg and some time ago it was not possible= to=20 build them for i386 (and of course run on 486+). This AFAIK did not cha= nge. These not yet written parts of kernel do not exist so nothing to worry = about=20 right now. Anyway there always could be #warning for i386 - easy to cat= ch=20 while compiling and would allow to fix that future kernel code then. > cheers, > -Len > > Wouldn't be better to just remove #ifdef CONFIG_X86_CMPXCHG around > > __cmpxchg() and cmpxchg macro in ./include/asm-i386/system.h so cmp= xchg() > > would be there always even on i386 but leave CONFIG_X86_CMPXCHG mac= ro if > > anyone want's to check for it in some code. No code duplication and= you > > get what you need. --=20 Arkadiusz Mi=B6kiewicz CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux