From: Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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?
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?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
