On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 16:00 +0530, Srinivasa DS wrote:
> Sorry, I got it wrong, But I dont find my patch in your latest
> powerpc
> git tree(git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/benh/powerpc.git).
Hrm... I thought I merged it. I'll check that tomorrow.
Cheers,
Ben.
__
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 14:36 +0530, Srinivasa D S wrote:
On Monday 14 July 2008 02:36:57 pm Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Signed-off-by: Srinivasa DS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Can you send a cleanup patch against powerpc.git instead ?
Resending the patch against power
On Monday 14 July 2008 11:06:47 pm Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Srinivasa D S wrote:
> >> +#define task_pt_regs(tsk) (tsk)->thread.regs
> >
> > Shouldn't this be:
> >
> > #define task_pt_regs(tsk) ((tsk)->thread.regs)
> >
> > just to be safe?
>
> Both
On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 14:36 +0530, Srinivasa D S wrote:
> On Monday 14 July 2008 02:36:57 pm Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> > > Signed-off-by: Srinivasa DS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Can you send a cleanup patch against powerpc.git instead ?
> >
>
> Resending the patch against powerpc.git tre
On Monday 14 July 2008 02:36:57 pm Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Srinivasa DS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Can you send a cleanup patch against powerpc.git instead ?
>
Resending the patch against powerpc.git tree.
Signed-off-by: Srinivasa DS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
include/asm-
Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Srinivasa D S wrote:
>
>> +#define task_pt_regs(tsk) (tsk)->thread.regs
>
> Shouldn't this be:
>
> #define task_pt_regs(tsk) ((tsk)->thread.regs)
>
> just to be safe?
Both -> and . have already highest precedence as postfix operators.
Andrea
Srinivasa D S wrote:
> +#define task_pt_regs(tsk)(tsk)->thread.regs
Shouldn't this be:
#define task_pt_regs(tsk) ((tsk)->thread.regs)
just to be safe?
--
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 14:01 +0530, Srinivasa D S wrote:
> On Monday 14 July 2008 04:02:41 am Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > > Below attached patch defines this macro for powerpc arch. Please let
> > > me know your comments on this.
> > >
> > > +#define task_pt_regs(tsk)((struct pt_regs *)(tsk)
On Monday 14 July 2008 04:02:41 am Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > Below attached patch defines this macro for powerpc arch. Please let
> > me know your comments on this.
> >
> > +#define task_pt_regs(tsk) ((struct pt_regs *)(tsk)->thread.regs)
>
> The cast is unnecessary since tsk->thread.regs is alr
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 08:32 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Srinivasa D S writes:
>
> > task_pt_regs() macro defines pt_regs for the given task, this macro is
> > currently not defined for powerpc arch. We need this macro for
> > upcoming utrace features.
> > Below attached patch defines th
Srinivasa D S writes:
> task_pt_regs() macro defines pt_regs for the given task, this macro is
> currently not defined for powerpc arch. We need this macro for
> upcoming utrace features.
> Below attached patch defines this macro for powerpc arch. Please let
> me know your comments on thi
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 19:52 +0530, Srinivasa D S wrote:
> Hi
> task_pt_regs() macro defines pt_regs for the given task, this macro is
> currently not defined for powerpc arch. We need this macro for
> upcoming utrace features.
> Below attached patch defines this macro for powerpc arch. Plea
Hi
task_pt_regs() macro defines pt_regs for the given task, this macro is
currently not defined for powerpc arch. We need this macro for
upcoming utrace features.
Below attached patch defines this macro for powerpc arch. Please let
me know your comments on this.
Signed-off-by: Srinivasa D
13 matches
Mail list logo
