* KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Ingo,
> > >
> > > On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:00:55 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > -#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) ({ *get_cpu_mask(cpu); })
> > > > > +#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) (*get_cpu_mask(cpu))
> > > >
> > > > hm, i'm wondering - is this a compiler bug?
> > >
> > > Or maybe a deficiency in such an old compiler (v3.4.5) but the fix
> > > makes sense anyway, right?
> >
> > yeah, i was just wondering.
>
> in linux/README
>
> COMPILING the kernel:
>
> - Make sure you have at least gcc 3.2 available.
> For more information, refer to Documentation/Changes.
>
> So, if 3.4.5 is old, Should we change readme?
the fix is simple enough.
but the question is, wont it generate huge artificial stackframes with
CONFIG_MAXSMP and NR_CPUS=4096? Maybe it is unable to figure out and
simplify the arithmetics there - or something like that.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
