* Martin Schwidefsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 10:48 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > Defining GENERIC_LOCKBREAK in arch/s390/Kconfig takes care of it. > > I'll > > > cook up a patch and queue it in git390. > > > > the one below should do the trick. > > Thanks but I already queued a different one (see below). The other > architectures that define GENERIC_LOCKBREAK have the "depends on SMP > && PREEMPT" line as well. The line does make sense if you look at the > way how spin_is_contended is used, no ?
yes, you are right and your fix is the correct one. Currently, if we define GENERIC_LOCKBREAK on UP then we get accesses to the non-existing lock->need_lockbreak field. [ btw., this is really a small uncleanliness in the generic code: it should be possible for an architecture to just enable GENERIC_LOCKBREAK unconditionally, to indicate that it intends to "let the generic code do this". Then the generic code, when it does not have a field (such as on UP), should just not access it. But this is a small detail. ] Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/