Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: hashed spinlocks | From | Daniel Walker <> | Date | Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:16:01 -0700 |
| |
On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 12:11 -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com> > Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:06:47 -0700 > > > The ifdef that switched between the two rt_hash_lock_addr() switched on > > for CONFIG_SMP or CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK . I was compiling UP , so I > > didn't get either. > > > > Seems like you'll need to have an rt_hash_lock(slot) that replaces the > > spin_lock calls .. > > spin_lock(x) and spin_unlock(x) are both a nop in this case, so what > is the problem passing in a NULL? The argument is arbitrary and should > should just ignored, right?
True.
> If both CONFIG_SMP and CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK are disabled, we > end up with these definitions in linux/spinlock.h > > #define spin_lock(lock) _spin_lock(lock) > > #define _spin_lock(lock) \ > do { \ > preempt_disable(); \ > _raw_spin_lock(lock); \ > __acquire(lock); \ > } while(0) > > #define _raw_spin_lock(lock) do { (void)(lock); } while(0) > > What kind of warning do you get?
It was an RT kernel, which isn't mainline .. Your right it shouldn't be a problem .
Daniel
- 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/
| |