From: Grant Grundler <grundler@parisc-linux.org>
To: Joel Soete <soete.joel@tiscali.be>
Cc: parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org
Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] spinlock 2.4 re-organise a la 2.6 [was: [RFC] rewrite kernel spinlock code to work better with gcc]
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:10:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031130211014.GA5208@colo.lackof.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3FCA1B75.9020600@tiscali.be>
On Sun, Nov 30, 2003 at 04:31:49PM +0000, Joel Soete wrote:
> No, i think it is right but I forgot to embrace spinlock_t declaration
> with "#ifdef CONFIG_SMP ...#endif" in system.h. Done in the new attched
> patch (tested and run fine on c100 (32bit up) with kernel up and smp)
> My bad in previous test: forgot make distclean ; make mrproper (to be sure).
Use of "make distclean" means you don't have the dependencies correct.
ie whereever "ifdef CONFIG_*" is used, linux/config.h needs to be included.
> If you find some interest can you ci (I would like to test Randolph
> patch on n4k just to be sure).
I don't. I have a basic problem with this patch.
...
> -#include <asm/spinlock_t.h>
...
> diff -Naur linux-2.4.23-rc5-pa17/include/asm-parisc/spinlock_t.h linux-2.4.23-rc5-pa17-bp/include/asm-parisc/spinlock_t.h
> --- linux-2.4.23-rc5-pa17/include/asm-parisc/spinlock_t.h 2003-11-29 16:13:04.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.4.23-rc5-pa17-bp/include/asm-parisc/spinlock_t.h 1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
> @@ -1,97 +0,0 @@
> -#ifndef __PARISC_SPINLOCK_T_H
> -#define __PARISC_SPINLOCK_T_H
...
Why delete spinlock_t.h?
I added spinlock_t.h to resolve the circular inter-dependency between
asm/system.h, asm/bitops.h, and asm/spinlock.h. spinlock_t.h depends
on nothing and defines spinlock primitives used by the others.
grant
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-30 21:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-26 7:07 [parisc-linux] [RFC] rewrite kernel spinlock code to work better with gcc Randolph Chung
2003-11-26 16:54 ` John David Anglin
2003-11-29 23:50 ` Joel Soete
2003-11-29 23:35 ` Joel Soete
2003-11-30 0:43 ` [parisc-linux] spinlock 2.4 re-organise a la 2.6 [was: [RFC] rewrite kernel spinlock code to work better with gcc] Joel Soete
2003-11-30 3:37 ` Grant Grundler
2003-11-30 10:39 ` Joel Soete
2003-11-30 10:57 ` Joel Soete
2003-11-30 16:31 ` Joel Soete
2003-11-30 21:10 ` Grant Grundler [this message]
2003-12-01 7:00 ` Joel Soete
2003-11-30 0:51 ` [parisc-linux] [RFC] rewrite kernel spinlock code to work better with gcc Joel Soete
2003-12-01 15:14 ` Joel Soete
2003-12-01 18:30 ` John David Anglin
2003-12-02 16:42 ` Joel Soete
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=20031130211014.GA5208@colo.lackof.org \
--to=grundler@parisc-linux.org \
--cc=parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org \
--cc=soete.joel@tiscali.be \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox