This here is i586/100, egcs-1.1, binutils-18.104.22.168.15, glibc-2.0.99
Kernel is linux-2.1.127pre3. No trouble at all.
Just a couple of odd things that stuck me when skimming the patch: In
include/asm-i386/spinlock.h the definition of spinlock_t for UP and gcc <
2.8 stuffs something into the structure to keep gcc happy, while rwlock_t
does not get the same attention. Oversight?
The corresponding definition for SPARC in include/asm-sparc/spinlock.h
defines spinlock_t as an unsigned char, that is never really used but is
passed around. Wouldn't it be better to do it like i386, where gcc
optimizes the empty structure into complete oblivion?
In any case, it would be better to pick _one_ strategy and stick to it,
-- Horst von Brand email@example.com Casilla 9G, Viņa del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/