From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754302AbYKGQMw (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:12:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752536AbYKGQMl (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:12:41 -0500 Received: from tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.34]:34818 "EHLO tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752352AbYKGQMk (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:12:40 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtcEAK/2E0lMQWxa/2dsb2JhbACBdsgDg1Y Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:12:38 -0500 From: Mathieu Desnoyers To: Andrew Morton Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Pitre , Ralf Baechle , benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, David Miller , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Steven Rostedt , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC patch 07/18] Trace clock core Message-ID: <20081107161237.GA22134@Krystal> References: <20081107052336.652868737@polymtl.ca> <20081107053349.699011457@polymtl.ca> <20081106215256.a9f01ec4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081107061643.GA798@Krystal> <20081106222656.8e35d9d5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081106222656.8e35d9d5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Editor: vi X-Info: http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080 X-Operating-System: Linux/2.6.21.3-grsec (i686) X-Uptime: 11:12:21 up 155 days, 20:52, 6 users, load average: 0.61, 0.67, 0.60 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andrew Morton (akpm@linux-foundation.org) wrote: > On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 01:16:43 -0500 Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > > > > Is there something we should be fixing in m68k? > > > > > > > Yes, but I fear it's going to go deep into include hell :-( > > Oh, OK. I thought that the comment meant that m68k's on_each_cpu() > behaves differently at runtime from other architectures (and wrongly). > > If it's just some compile-time #include snafu then that's far less > of a concern. > Should I simply remove this comment then ? -- Mathieu Desnoyers OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68