On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Corey Minyard wrote: > I was looking over the RT patch and I had a couple of questions: > > Is there a reason that the PREEMPT_LAZY code is not ifdef-ed out when > PREEMPT_LAZY is disabled. I can't see a reason to leave it in, it's > just dead code at that point. I'd be happy to do a patch to fix this. > > Why does preempt_disable_rt() become a barrier when PREEMPT_RT is > disabled? Why isn't it just nothing? Because I'm a lazy bastard and I fundamentaly hate #ifdefs :) Thanks, tglx -- 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
