Re: [PATCH] s390 (9/9): no timer interrupts in idle.

From: Dipankar Sarma
Date: Wed Apr 21 2004 - 16:04:57 EST

On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 09:46:05PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 02:13:04AM +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
> > I think CPU_MASK_NONE can be used only for assignments. You need
> > to actually declare a generic idle_cpu_mask and set it to CPU_MASK_NONE
> > for all other archs. Of course, then the compiler will not be able
> > to optimize it out :)
> Well, there's a const keyword in C these days, no?

OK, then I missed what optimization you were talking about or underestimated
gcc. Can gcc do inter-procedural constant propagation ?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at