Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Aug 2018 11:41:29 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC] Make call_srcu() available during very early boot |
| |
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 02:34:51PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 10:44:43 -0700 > "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > If I recall correctly, this subterfuge suppresses compiler complaints > > > > about initializing an unsigned long with a negative number. :-/ > > > > > > Did you try: > > > > > > .srcu_gp_seq_needed = -1UL, > > > > > > ? > > > > Works for my compiler, not sure what set of complaints pushed me in that > > direction. > > I've used -1UL for unsigned long initializations for pretty much my > entire programming career. I've never had any issues with it.
Fair enough. I have to fix a "void void" that my compilers were happy with, so might as well do this one also. "I am telling you, don't even -think- about expecting a return value from -this- function!!!" ;-)
Thanx, Paul
| |