This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] linuxthreads for hppa (1/3)
Ulrich,
> - -# if __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT != 0
> - - __pthread_handles[0].h_lock = __LOCK_INITIALIZER;
> - - __pthread_handles[1].h_lock = __LOCK_INITIALIZER;
> +# ifdef __LT_INITIALIZER_NOT_ZERO
> + __pthread_handles[0].h_lock = __LOCK_ALT_INITIALIZER;
> + __pthread_handles[1].h_lock = __LOCK_ALT_INITIALIZER;
>
> part is what I meant. There is no reason to change the name.
How do you propose it be handled? All arches define __LT_SPINLOCK_INIT
and thus it cannot be used to distinguish between the two cases. Why do
we distinguish between the two cases? Because a structure as an
initializer has two different assignments cases, one in which it is
named and one which it is not.
> Look at your change, no changes of code which are not needed. Clean up
> the patches to follow the coding standard, preprocessor indentation, etc
> etc.
I do apologize for the STACK_GROWS_UP patches being included, and
rightly so I removed them. Thank you for applying those patches.
I will go over my patches again for coding standard, preprocessor
indentation and other grievences. In most cases I have tried to follow
the standard.
Cheers,
Carlos.