Re: [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup

On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 05:35:27PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> This is not exactly a thing of beauty either.  It's much cleaner to use
> __attribute__((weak)), but that will add an empty call-return to everyone's
> interrupts.

Let's not go overboard with the weak stuff - it does not get removed
at link time, so it remains as dead code in the kernel image.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:  2.6 Serial core
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] consistently use MAX_ERRNO in __syscall_return
• Next by Date: 8250_pci.c, parport_serial.c, __devinit and !CONFIG_HOTPLUG
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup
• 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]