Re: [PATCH RT] convert RCU Preempt tasklet into softirq.

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 11:27:08AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 14:02 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> 
> > Some nits below.
> > 
> > 						Thanx, Paul
> > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > Index: linux-2.6.21-rt9/include/linux/rcupreempt.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-2.6.21-rt9.orig/include/linux/rcupreempt.h
> > > +++ linux-2.6.21-rt9/include/linux/rcupreempt.h
> > > @@ -63,7 +63,9 @@ extern void rcu_check_callbacks(int cpu,
> > >  extern void rcu_restart_cpu(int cpu);
> > >  extern long rcu_batches_completed(void);
> > > 
> > > -extern void rcu_process_callbacks(unsigned long unused);
> > > +struct softirq_action;
> > > +
> > > +extern void rcu_process_callbacks(struct softirq_action *unused);
> > 
> > I don't understand why the above is needed -- interrupt.h is included,
> > and the use of rcu_process_callbacks() follows the definition.
> > 
> > >  #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> > >  #endif /* __LINUX_RCUPREEMPT_H */
> 
> The first time I compiled it, I forgot the ';' and got a warning there.
> But the warning also included "declaring structure softirq_action in
> prototype", so I fixed both the ';' and added the struct. I can try
> compile without it. But I also know that adding #include <interrupt.h>
> in rcupreempt.h caused issues too.

If I leave out both the "struct softirq_action" and the
rcu_process_callbacks() declaration,, it compiles for me.

So I guess the rcu_process_callbacks() should be declared static...

						Thanx, Paul
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/