Re: Dead spinlock fields

Linus Torvalds (torvalds@transmeta.com)
11 Jan 1998 16:52:59 GMT

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Alan Cox: "2.1.78 sbpcd is broken"
Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Re: Bad gcc code for atomic_dec"
Maybe in reply to: Keith Owens: "Dead spinlock fields"

In article <19980111102037.3681.qmail@mail.ocs.com.au>,
Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au> wrote:
>include/asm-i386/spinlock.h defines a spinlock with a "previous" field
>that is never used. Even in alpha/spinlock, the field is only used to
>print info for stuck spinlocks. Do we still need the "previous" field
>in spinlocks?

No. It was only used while debugging the very initial new SMP code, it
is fairly useless now. I guess I should just remove it.

Linus

Next message: Alan Cox: "2.1.78 sbpcd is broken"
Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Re: Bad gcc code for atomic_dec"
Maybe in reply to: Keith Owens: "Dead spinlock fields"