[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <535047B6.6000404@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:29:26 -0400
From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@...il.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>,
Chegu Vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 05/19] qspinlock: Optimize for smaller NR_CPUS
On 04/17/2014 11:50 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:03:57AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> +#if !defined(__LITTLE_ENDIAN)&& !defined(__BIG_ENDIAN)
>> +#error "Missing either LITTLE_ENDIAN or BIG_ENDIAN definition."
>> +#endif
> This seems entirely superfluous, I don't think a kernel build will go
> anywhere if either is missing.
Yes, I am on the conservative side when I add that. I can certainly take
it out if you think that is not needed.
-Longman
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists