The patch titled
     Let smp_call_function_single return -EBUSY on UP
has been removed from the -mm tree.  Its filename was
     let-smp_call_function_single-return-ebusy-on-up.patch

This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree

------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Let smp_call_function_single return -EBUSY on UP
From: Heiko Carstens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

All architectures that have an implementation of smp_call_function_single
let it return -EBUSY if it is asked to execute func on the current cpu. 
(akpm: except for x86_64).  Therefore the UP version must always return
-EBUSY.

[EMAIL PROTECTED]: build fix]
Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---

 include/linux/smp.h |    7 +++----
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff -puN include/linux/smp.h~let-smp_call_function_single-return-ebusy-on-up 
include/linux/smp.h
--- a/include/linux/smp.h~let-smp_call_function_single-return-ebusy-on-up
+++ a/include/linux/smp.h
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
  *             Alan Cox. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  */
 
+#include <linux/errno.h>
 
 extern void cpu_idle(void);
 
@@ -99,11 +100,9 @@ static inline void smp_send_reschedule(i
 #define num_booting_cpus()                     1
 #define smp_prepare_boot_cpu()                 do {} while (0)
 static inline int smp_call_function_single(int cpuid, void (*func) (void 
*info),
-                               void *info, int retry, int wait)
+                                          void *info, int retry, int wait)
 {
-       /* Disable interrupts here? */
-       func(info);
-       return 0;
+       return -EBUSY;
 }
 
 #endif /* !SMP */
_

Patches currently in -mm which might be from [EMAIL PROTECTED] are

origin.patch
git-s390.patch
s390-spinlock-initializer-cleanup.patch
x86_64-fix-smp_call_function_single-return-value.patch

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to