On Mon, 16 Jun 2014, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Evaluating a macro argument only if certain configuration options
> have been selected is confusing and error-prone. Hence always
> evaluate the second argument of spin_lock_nested() and
> spin_lock_nest_lock().
>
> This patch has the intentional
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014, Bart Van Assche wrote:
Evaluating a macro argument only if certain configuration options
have been selected is confusing and error-prone. Hence always
evaluate the second argument of spin_lock_nested() and
spin_lock_nest_lock().
This patch has the intentional side
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Evaluating a macro argument only if certain configuration options
> have been selected is confusing and error-prone. Hence always
> evaluate the second argument of spin_lock_nested() and
> spin_lock_nest_lock().
>
> This patch has the intentional
Evaluating a macro argument only if certain configuration options
have been selected is confusing and error-prone. Hence always
evaluate the second argument of spin_lock_nested() and
spin_lock_nest_lock().
This patch has the intentional side effect that it avoids that the
following warning is
Evaluating a macro argument only if certain configuration options
have been selected is confusing and error-prone. Hence always
evaluate the second argument of spin_lock_nested() and
spin_lock_nest_lock().
This patch has the intentional side effect that it avoids that the
following warning is
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014, Bart Van Assche wrote:
Evaluating a macro argument only if certain configuration options
have been selected is confusing and error-prone. Hence always
evaluate the second argument of spin_lock_nested() and
spin_lock_nest_lock().
This patch has the intentional side
6 matches
Mail list logo