Re: [PATCH] just rename call_rcu_bh instead of making it a macro

2007-09-26 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 02:17:47PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > Seems that I found a box that has a config that passes call_rcu_bh as a > function pointer (see net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c), so declaring the > call_rcu_bh has a macro function isn't good enough. > > This patch makes it just another

[PATCH] just rename call_rcu_bh instead of making it a macro

2007-09-26 Thread Steven Rostedt
Seems that I found a box that has a config that passes call_rcu_bh as a function pointer (see net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c), so declaring the call_rcu_bh has a macro function isn't good enough. This patch makes it just another name of call_rcu for rcupreempt. Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL

[PATCH] just rename call_rcu_bh instead of making it a macro

2007-09-26 Thread Steven Rostedt
Seems that I found a box that has a config that passes call_rcu_bh as a function pointer (see net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c), so declaring the call_rcu_bh has a macro function isn't good enough. This patch makes it just another name of call_rcu for rcupreempt. Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt [EMAIL

Re: [PATCH] just rename call_rcu_bh instead of making it a macro

2007-09-26 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 02:17:47PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: Seems that I found a box that has a config that passes call_rcu_bh as a function pointer (see net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c), so declaring the call_rcu_bh has a macro function isn't good enough. This patch makes it just another name