* Nicholas Mc Guire | 2014-02-05 10:26:57 [+0100]: >Sorry - this one causes a build failure with PREEMPT_RT_BASE=y and >PREEMPT_RT_FULL not set. At some point we are going to drop PREEMPT_RT_BASE because it was only meant for debugging in the beginning. However I don't know when this will be. >The patch below fixes this build failure for 3.12.9-rt13. > >Not sure what the clean way of resolving this is - this patch proposes to >move the spin_*_local into linux/locallock.h and map to spin_*lock for >the "CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL not set" case. > >This was build tested with Preempt none,voluntary,low-lat,base,full and >otherweise got only limited testing. > >I'm also not sure if putting the rt specific locks into locallock.h in >this way is the proper way to deal with this #include dependency. I think I keep it that way. However I split into two patches and add the spin_lock_local => rt_spin_lock mapping in the rt-add-rt-locks.patch where the locks are introduced. Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
