Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > - Introduces a kernel-wide macro `SMP_KERNEL'. This is designed to
> > be used as a `compiled ifdef' in place of `#ifdef CONFIG_SMP'. There
> > are a few examples in __wake_up_common().
>
> Please don't do this,
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Introduces a kernel-wide macro `SMP_KERNEL'. This is designed to
be used as a `compiled ifdef' in place of `#ifdef CONFIG_SMP'. There
are a few examples in __wake_up_common().
Please don't do this,
OK.
So
On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> - Introduces a kernel-wide macro `SMP_KERNEL'. This is designed to
> be used as a `compiled ifdef' in place of `#ifdef CONFIG_SMP'. There
> are a few examples in __wake_up_common().
Please don't do this, it screws up the config option
On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Introduces a kernel-wide macro `SMP_KERNEL'. This is designed to
be used as a `compiled ifdef' in place of `#ifdef CONFIG_SMP'. There
are a few examples in __wake_up_common().
Please don't do this, it screws up the config option
Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> It's been quiet around here lately...
>
> This is a rework of the 2.4 wakeup code based on the discussions Andrea
> and I had last week. There were two basic problems:
>
> - If two tasks are on a waitqueue in exclusive mode and one gets
> woken, it will put itself
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 10:45:29PM +1100, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> >
> >
> > Not a big deal but still I'd prefer the CONFIG_SMP #ifdef though, it looks even
> > more obvious that it's a compile check and at least in your usage I cannot see
> > a relevant readability
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
>
> Not a big deal but still I'd prefer the CONFIG_SMP #ifdef though, it looks even
> more obvious that it's a compile check and at least in your usage I cannot see
> a relevant readability advantage. And my own feeling is not having to rely on
> more things to produce
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
Not a big deal but still I'd prefer the CONFIG_SMP #ifdef though, it looks even
more obvious that it's a compile check and at least in your usage I cannot see
a relevant readability advantage. And my own feeling is not having to rely on
more things to produce the
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 10:45:29PM +1100, Andrew Morton wrote:
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
Not a big deal but still I'd prefer the CONFIG_SMP #ifdef though, it looks even
more obvious that it's a compile check and at least in your usage I cannot see
a relevant readability advantage. And
Andrew Morton wrote:
It's been quiet around here lately...
This is a rework of the 2.4 wakeup code based on the discussions Andrea
and I had last week. There were two basic problems:
- If two tasks are on a waitqueue in exclusive mode and one gets
woken, it will put itself back into
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 01:57:12PM +1100, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Oh, it's all still there, but it's now all in the header file:
>
> #ifdef DEBUG
> #define foo() printk(stuff)
> #else
> #define foo()
> #endif
I intentionally didn't focused on such part of your patch because I understood
from the
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 11:29:06AM +1100, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > - Got rid of all the debugging ifdefs - these have been folded into
> > wait.h
>
> Why? Such debugging code is just disabled so it doesn't get compiled in, but if
> somebody wants he can enable it
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 11:29:06AM +1100, Andrew Morton wrote:
> - Got rid of all the debugging ifdefs - these have been folded into
> wait.h
Why? Such debugging code is just disabled so it doesn't get compiled in, but if
somebody wants he can enable it changing the #define in the sources to
It's been quiet around here lately...
This is a rework of the 2.4 wakeup code based on the discussions Andrea
and I had last week. There were two basic problems:
- If two tasks are on a waitqueue in exclusive mode and one gets
woken, it will put itself back into TASK_[UN]INTERRUPTIBLE state
It's been quiet around here lately...
This is a rework of the 2.4 wakeup code based on the discussions Andrea
and I had last week. There were two basic problems:
- If two tasks are on a waitqueue in exclusive mode and one gets
woken, it will put itself back into TASK_[UN]INTERRUPTIBLE state
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 11:29:06AM +1100, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Got rid of all the debugging ifdefs - these have been folded into
wait.h
Why? Such debugging code is just disabled so it doesn't get compiled in, but if
somebody wants he can enable it changing the #define in the sources to
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 01:57:12PM +1100, Andrew Morton wrote:
Oh, it's all still there, but it's now all in the header file:
#ifdef DEBUG
#define foo() printk(stuff)
#else
#define foo()
#endif
I intentionally didn't focused on such part of your patch because I understood
from the
17 matches
Mail list logo
