On Mon, 2012-08-20 at 08:19 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > > + for (;;) {
> > > + if (entry == &dead)
>
> But your compiler likes "entry == &dead"? ;-)
>
Yes, fancy as GCC is these days, it doesn't quite bother with the
meta-physical questions just yet.
--
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/
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Dave Jones
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Oleg Nesterov
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Oleg Nesterov
- task_work_add() should not succeed uncondition... Oleg Nesterov
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Steven Rostedt
- Re: lockdep trace from posix time... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Oleg Nesterov
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix time... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix time... Oleg Nesterov
- Re: lockdep trace from posix time... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix time... Oleg Nesterov
- Re: lockdep trace from posix time... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Oleg Nesterov
- Re: lockdep trace from posix timers Peter Zijlstra
- Re: lockdep trace from posix time... Oleg Nesterov

