> So if given the choice between the 2, I think checking
> !CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK is better just because we use that to
> decide the implementation/structure layout.
Yeah, I suspect this is more suitable as well. Thanks.
8<---------------------------------------------
From: Davidlohr Bueso <davidl...@hp.com>
Subject: [PATCH] rwsem: Fix warnings for CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK
Optimistic spinning is only used by the xadd variant
of rw-semaphores. Make sure that we use the old version
of the __RWSEM_INITIALIZER macro for systems that rely
on the spinlock one, otherwise warnings can be triggered,
such as the following reported on an arm box:
ipc/ipcns_notifier.c:22:8: warning: excess elements in struct initializer
[enabled by default]
ipc/ipcns_notifier.c:22:8: warning: (near initialization for
'ipcns_chain.rwsem') [enabled by default]
ipc/ipcns_notifier.c:22:8: warning: excess elements in struct initializer
[enabled by default]
ipc/ipcns_notifier.c:22:8: warning: (near initialization for
'ipcns_chain.rwsem') [enabled by default]
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidl...@hp.com>
---
include/linux/rwsem.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/rwsem.h b/include/linux/rwsem.h
index 3e108f1..8d79708 100644
--- a/include/linux/rwsem.h
+++ b/include/linux/rwsem.h
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ static inline int rwsem_is_locked(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
# define __RWSEM_DEP_MAP_INIT(lockname)
#endif
-#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) && !defined(CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK)
#define __RWSEM_INITIALIZER(name) \
{ RWSEM_UNLOCKED_VALUE, \
__RAW_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(name.wait_lock), \
--
1.8.1.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
