Issue #2449 has been updated by Sascha Wildner.
Here's some mental notes from when I looked into the issue some time ago: * I think the "++spin->countb;" can be moved up into the INVARIANTS too. In fact, the whole "countb" member of struct spinlock seems to be INVARIANTS dependent (as in, it's checked only in INVARIANTS code, afaict). * AFAIR, iwn(4) also has an INVARIANTS issue, which (afaict) isn't so easy to fix. If you want to look at it too, you might want to try to compile a LINT kernel without INVARIANTS. ---------------------------------------- Submit #2449: INVARIANTS option fix. http://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/2449 Author: Adam Sakareassen Status: New Priority: Normal Assignee: Category: Target version: With the INVARIANTS option defined the kernel does not build. This small patch fixes the issue. -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: http://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/my/account
