WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-merge

[Xen-merge] Re: synch_bitops.h

To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-merge] Re: synch_bitops.h
From: Christian Limpach <Christian.Limpach@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 14:05:12 +0000
Cc: xen-merge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 14:10:42 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <43BE6271.76F0.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-merge-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: xen-merge <xen-merge.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-merge@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-merge>, <mailto:xen-merge-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-merge>, <mailto:xen-merge-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <43BE6271.76F0.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-merge-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 12:28:33PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> I realize that it was your preference to not split the i386 and x86-64
> variants, as I had suggested with my patch. However, in course of
> undoing that patch the bug fixes got dropped, too. Was that
> intentional?

I dropped the changes where instead of using =m, you suggested using +m.
The original Linux' bitops.h uses =m and using +m doesn't really make
a difference in this case.

    christian


_______________________________________________
Xen-merge mailing list
Xen-merge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-merge

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>