Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:35:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:35:32 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:55538 "EHLO hermes.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:35:31 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] reduce code in generic spinlock.h From: Robert Love To: Dave Hansen Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Adam G Litke In-Reply-To: <3D3D8414.1040201@us.ibm.com> References: <3D3D8414.1040201@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 23 Jul 2002 09:38:39 -0700 Message-Id: <1027442320.3581.100.camel@sinai> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1089 Lines: 25 On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 09:28, Dave Hansen wrote: > The last time lockmeter was ported to 2.5, it was getting a little > messy. There were separate declarations for spin_*lock() for each > combination of lockmeter and preemption, which made four, plus the > no-smp definition. While lockmeter's mess isn't the kernel's fault, > we noticed some some simplifications which could be made to the > generic spinlock code. This patch uses a single definition for each > of the macros, eliminating some redundant code. I have no problems with this (assuming it is right and it looks so on first glance). It will not apply to Linus's current tree, however, because of the IRQ rewrite that is now applied. If you pull his BK tree and diff against that, you should be OK... most notably, the preemption code has moved to preempt.h. Robert Love - 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/