On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> You are right about UP, and the patch below adds the UP variants. It's
> analogous to the existing wrapping concept that UP 'spinlocks' are
> always unlocked on UP. (spin_can_lock() is already properly defined on
> UP too.)
Looking closer, it _looks_ like the spinlock debug case never had a
"spin_is_locked()" define at all. Or am I blind? Maybe UP doesn't
want/need it after all?
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
