Re: recalc_sigpending() / recalc_sigpending_tsk() ?

• Next message: fabrizio.gennari@philips.com: "RE: Oxford Semiconductor's OXCB950 UART not recognized by serial. c"
• Previous message: Andrew Morton: "Re: Sync over loop devices takes ages? [2.4.17]"
• In reply to: Linus Torvalds: "Re: recalc_sigpending() / recalc_sigpending_tsk() ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

torvalds@transmeta.com said:
> Not a chance in hell. The backwards compatibility looks like a
> trivial one-liner:

> compat-2.4.h:
> #define recalc_sigpending() recalc_sigpending(current)

> so what are you complaining about?

Fine. I was trying to define a back-compat version of recalc_sigpending_tsk()
too, before going through all the code and changing recalc_sigpending(current)
to recalc_sigpending and recalc_sigpending(other) to recalc_sigpending_tsk()
- but as you rightly point out there's no justification for using the latter
in any of the driver or fs code that I'm trying to support - and hence it
isn't present, and doesn't need the compat support.

--
dwmw2
-
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/

• Next message: fabrizio.gennari@philips.com: "RE: Oxford Semiconductor's OXCB950 UART not recognized by serial. c"
• Previous message: Andrew Morton: "Re: Sync over loop devices takes ages? [2.4.17]"
• In reply to: Linus Torvalds: "Re: recalc_sigpending() / recalc_sigpending_tsk() ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 28 2002 - 21:00:43 EST