From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: INIT_PREEMPT_COUNT Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:15:54 -0600 Message-ID: <20090711101554.GA24310@parisc-linux.org> References: <20090710125755.559739294@chello.nl> <20090710130125.037018244@chello.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:53731 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752541AbZGKKP4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jul 2009 06:15:56 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090710130125.037018244@chello.nl> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Matt Mackall , Anton Vorontsov , Andrew Morton , oleg@redhat.com, mingo@elte.hu, tony.luck@intel.com, rth@twiddle.net, geert@linux-m68k.org On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 02:57:56PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Pull the initial preempt_count value into a single > definition site. > > Maintainers for: alpha, ia64 and m68k, please have a look, > your arch code is funny. Goodness. I remember sending patches to fix the initial value of preempt_count on these architectures about four-five years ago. Guess they were ignored. It just shows that we need to keep pulling stuff out of arch/. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."