Greg KH wrote:
quoted text > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 02:07:42PM +0200, Stefan Bader wrote:
>> This converted the raw_spinlock usage which is used in the upstream patch but
>> not available in 2.6.32 to normal spinlock usage. Should it get annotated to
>> document that?
>
> why, you obviously figured that out :)
>
> It's not the normal thing to do for backports otherwise we would be here
> all day long...
Sometimes its more or less to change. Well at least David saying "nah" and not
"hm argh" achieved half of what the intention of the suggested annotation was. :)
Thanks,
Stefan
quoted text > thanks,
>
> greg k-h
> --
> 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/
--
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/
Messages in current thread:
Re: [stable] patch sparc64-make-prom-entry-spinlock-nmi-sa ... , Stefan Bader , (Wed Mar 31, 12:18 am)