Re: [PATCH 1/1] rcu: cleanup: make rcutorture specific definitions depend on config value

2014-04-21 Thread Pranith Kumar
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Good observation, but this approach prevents someone from building an > rcutorture module after the fact for a kernel that was built with > CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST=n. So I have to say "no" on this one. > OK, I did not consider that ca

Re: [PATCH 1/1] rcu: cleanup: make rcutorture specific definitions depend on config value

2014-04-21 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 08:07:52PM -0400, Pranith Kumar wrote: > Seems that my previous mail was borked while copying the patch. Please find > the fixed patch below: > > make rcutorture specific variables in tree.c depend on CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST > This avoid having to have them when no torture

Re: [PATCH 1/1] rcu: cleanup: make rcutorture specific definitions depend on config value

2014-04-20 Thread Pranith Kumar
Seems that my previous mail was borked while copying the patch. Please find the fixed patch below: make rcutorture specific variables in tree.c depend on CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST This avoid having to have them when no torture tests are running. Also cleanup some macros which are rcutorture specifi

[PATCH 1/1] rcu: cleanup: make rcutorture specific definitions depend on config value

2014-04-20 Thread Pranith Kumar
make rcutorture specific variables in tree.c depend on CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST This avoid having to have them when no torture tests are running. Also cleanup some macros which are rcutorture specific. Tested with rcutorture both in-built and as a module Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar --- include