Re: [patch] 2.3.6 alpha fixes

Mitchell Blank Jr (mitch@execpc.com)
Mon, 14 Jun 1999 05:35:47 -0500

David S. Miller wrote:
> #define spin_trylock(lock) ((int) 0)
>
> No, on uniprocessor it must always return true, indicating that you
> have acquired the lock :-)

For the record as of 2.3.7pre2-dangerous this seems to be broken on
multiple archs:

alpha: #define spin_trylock(lock) ((void) 0)
arm: #define spin_trylock(lock) do { } while(0)
m68k: #define spin_trylock(lock) do { } while(0)
ppc: #define spin_trylock(lock) do { } while(0)
sparc: #define spin_trylock(lock) do { } while(0)
sparc64: #define spin_trylock(lock) do { } while(0)

i386 and mips seem to get it right (i.e. "(1)")

-Mitch

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/