RE: [PATCH] 2.5.68 FUTEX support should be optional

[Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky]

> From: Christopher Hoover [mailto:[e-mail]]
> 
> On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:14:46AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 09:32:07PM -0700, Christopher Hoover wrote:
> > > Not everyone needs futex support, so it should be optional.  This is
> > > needed for small platforms.
> >
> > Looks good.  I think you want to disable it unconditionally for
!CONFIG_MMU.
> 
> Good point.
> 
> Here it is again with the config change.  The previous version also had
> had a Makefile typo.  Plus a cond_syscall for compat_sys_futex to make
> it work for CONFIG_COMPAT (untested), as pointed out by akpm.

How does this affect mm_release() in fork.c? there is a call to sys_futex();
if you make it conditional, will it break anything in there?

Iñaky Pérez-González -- Not speaking for Intel -- all opinions are my own
(and my fault)