From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 2 Jun 2002 17:43:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 2 Jun 2002 17:43:06 -0400 Received: from holomorphy.com ([66.224.33.161]:21410 "EHLO holomorphy") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 2 Jun 2002 17:43:06 -0400 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2002 14:42:43 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: trivial@rustcorp.com.au Subject: duplicate declaration of rq in sched_init() Message-ID: <20020602214243.GH14918@holomorphy.com> Mail-Followup-To: William Lee Irwin III , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, trivial@rustcorp.com.au Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Description: brief message Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I found this one while trying to straighten out bootstrap ordering issues elsewhere. There appears to be a duplicate declaration of rq in sched_init(). This removes the nested declaration and otherwise leaves things alone. Cheers, Bill ===== kernel/sched.c 1.79 vs edited ===== --- 1.79/kernel/sched.c Wed May 29 08:26:26 2002 +++ edited/kernel/sched.c Sun Jun 2 14:38:24 2002 @@ -1591,9 +1591,9 @@ int i, j, k; for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) { - runqueue_t *rq = cpu_rq(i); prio_array_t *array; + rq = cpu_rq(i); rq->active = rq->arrays; rq->expired = rq->arrays + 1; spin_lock_init(&rq->lock);