On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 12:38:47PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> Linus just committed a patch to eliminate such offenders.
>> Do you mean #if CONFIG_NR_SIBLINGS != 0 or #ifdef CONFIG_NR_SIBLINGS?
On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 11:31:10PM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
> I don't know this code well, I'm just guessing the rigth way
> to make it compile. I don't know what's the "clean" way
> to do #if/#ifdefs either - I could probably do better if I knew.
> The problem was that CONFIG_SHARE_RUNQUEUE gets set even with
> configs where it doesn't make sense, (i.e. uniprocessor without HT)
> so I guessed it was some sort of misunderstanding about
> how #ifdef works. I hope whoever wrote that code will
> take a look and either say "yes - that's what I meant"
> or fix it in a better way.
Your fix was correct (the alternative is some rearrangment of those
#defines) and I carried it out with some additional #ifdef -> #if
conversions to cover the rest of the cases visible in my config and
sent it to akpm in another patch.
-- wli
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 15 2003 - 22:00:48 EST