On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 13:50 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> I changed it for now to the following, but it still desn't make sense to
> me. With a local_save_flags, which doesn't disable or restore the
> interrupts, why bother with the trace at all?
Or should the following patch really be applied? (it boots and compiles
nicely).
-- Steve
Index: linux_realtime_ernie/include/linux/rt_irq.h
===================================================================
--- linux_realtime_ernie/include/linux/rt_irq.h (revision 294)
+++ linux_realtime_ernie/include/linux/rt_irq.h (working copy)
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
# endif
/* soft state does not follow the hard state */
-# define raw_local_save_flags(flags) do { typecheck(unsigned long,flags); if (raw_irqs_disabled_flags(flags)) trace_irqs_off(); else trace_irqs_on(); __raw_local_save_flags(flags); } while (0)
+# define raw_local_save_flags(flags) do { typecheck(unsigned long,flags); __raw_local_save_flags(flags); } while (0)
# define raw_local_irq_enable() do { trace_irqs_on(); __raw_local_irq_enable(); } while (0)
# define raw_local_irq_disable() do { __raw_local_irq_disable(); trace_irqs_off(); } while (0)
# define raw_local_irq_save(flags) do { __raw_local_irq_save(flags); trace_irqs_off(); } while (0)
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |