Re: -rt7 announcement? (was Re: 2.6.18-rt6) and more info about a compile error

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 02:26 +0100, Sergio Monteiro Basto wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 16:40 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 21:26 +0100, Sergio Monteiro Basto wrote:
> > > rt7 should be to be applied on 2.6.18.1 
> > > still for 2.6.18 
> > > 
> > 
> > The -rt patch has always been against the most recent base kernel.  It
> > could be rebased against -stable but that would be more work for the
> > maintainers...
>  
> For me the most recent stable kernel is 2.6.18.1. 
> Normally change for .1 are very small but in this case I got 1, just 1,
> reject which I don't know to fix and prefer don't try it. My luck is the
> rej in a sparc arch and I can ignore it.

-rtXX is always against 2.6.X, never against the .stable versions.

> I got this compile error if I don't use CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL in .config
> 
> kernel/rtmutex.c:938:48: error: macro "rt_release_bkl" passed 2
> arguments, but takes just 1
> kernel/rtmutex.c: In function 'rt_mutex_slowlock':
> kernel/rtmutex.c:938: error: 'rt_release_bkl' undeclared (first use in
> this function)
> kernel/rtmutex.c:938: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported
> only once
> kernel/rtmutex.c:938: error: for each function it appears in.)

Fix below.

	tglx

Index: linux-2.6.18/kernel/rtmutex.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.18.orig/kernel/rtmutex.c	2006-10-24 06:33:02.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.18/kernel/rtmutex.c	2006-10-24 06:31:55.000000000 +0200
@@ -902,7 +902,10 @@ static inline void rt_reacquire_bkl(int 
 }
 
 #else
-# define rt_release_bkl(x)	(-1)
+static inline int rt_release_bkl(struct rt_mutex *lock, unsigned long flags)
+{
+	return -1;
+}
 # define rt_reacquire_bkl(x)	do { } while (0)
 #endif