Re: [PATCH 12/15] via-pmu: Wrap some uses of sleep_in_progress with proper ifdef's

Hi Ben

On Do, 2006-01-05 at 09:17 -0500, Ben Collins wrote: 
> On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 03:34 +0800, Kristian Mueller wrote:
> > We've already found a different solution to this in the Linuxppc-dev
> > list.
> > 
> > See:
> >  http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3737
> 
> That patch makes no sense. It just moves the variable out of the ifdef,
> but if CONFIG_PM or CONFIG_PPC32 is not enabled, then the variable never
> gets modified, and so is always 0. Why not just wrap all the code that
> uses it (like my patch did)?

I had quite the same approach in mind but as Olof Johansson remarked in
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3736 this would just
introduce more unnecessary #ifdefs.


Regards,
Kristian

-
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/

References:
- [PATCH 12/15] via-pmu: Wrap some uses of sleep_in_progress with proper ifdef's
  - From: Ben Collins <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 12/15] via-pmu: Wrap some uses of sleep_in_progress with proper ifdef's
  - From: Kristian Mueller <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 12/15] via-pmu: Wrap some uses of sleep_in_progress with proper ifdef's
  - From: Ben Collins <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [patch 00/2] improve .text size on gcc 4.0 and newer compilers
Next by Date: Re: oops pauser.
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 12/15] via-pmu: Wrap some uses of sleep_in_progress with proper ifdef's
Next by thread: [PATCH 14/15] workqueue: Check return of alloc_percpu().
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]