On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 18:00:19 +1000 Nick Piggin wrote:

quoted text
> On Wednesday 24 October 2007 15:09, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
> >
> > Can we expand this macro definition, or should I look for a way to
> > fool^W teach kernel-doc about this?
> >
> > scripts/kernel-doc says:
> > Error(linux-2.6.24-rc1//include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h:188): cannot understand
> > prototype: 'test_and_set_bit_lock test_and_set_bit '
> 
> Actually, it probably looks a bit nicer like this anyway. If you grep
> for it, then you can actually see the parameters...
> 
> On third thoughts, an inline function might be the best thing to do,
> and also avoid setting a bad example. What do you think?

That's probably best, yes.
Would you do the honors?


quoted text
> > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
> > ---
> >  include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h |    2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.24-rc1.orig/include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h
> > +++ linux-2.6.24-rc1/include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h
> > @@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ static inline int test_and_set_bit(int n
> >   *
> >   * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86
> >   */
> > -#define test_and_set_bit_lock test_and_set_bit
> > +#define test_and_set_bit_lock(nr, addr) test_and_set_bit(nr, addr)
> >
> >  /**
> >   * __test_and_set_bit - Set a bit and return its old value
> > ---


---
~Randy
-
unsubscribe notice
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/