Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Apr 2003 11:57:56 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [patch] acpi compile fix |
| |
Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 01:05:05PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > diff -puN drivers/acpi/osl.c~acpi-spinlock-casts drivers/acpi/osl.c > > --- 25/drivers/acpi/osl.c~acpi-spinlock-casts Thu Apr 3 13:00:54 2003 > > +++ 25-akpm/drivers/acpi/osl.c Thu Apr 3 13:01:25 2003 > > @@ -736,7 +736,7 @@ acpi_os_acquire_lock ( > > if (flags & ACPI_NOT_ISR) > > ACPI_DISABLE_IRQS(); > > > > - spin_lock(handle); > > + spin_lock((spinlock_t *)handle); > > Is there a reason these functions can't just have their arguments > changed to take a spinlock_t* instead of an acpi_handle ? > That cast looks really fugly IMO. >
I think acpi_handle_t is "an opaque type specific to the OS on which the APCI code happens to be running".
It is presently `void *', implicitly pointing at a spinlock_t.
If the above guesses (I'd prefer not to look) are correct then
struct acpi_handle_t { spinlock_t lock; };
would make a ton more sense.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |