Re: s_lock.h default definitions are rather confused

andres@anarazel.de (Andres Freund) writes:
> On 2015-01-14 19:31:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>>> Right now I think a #ifdef/undef S_UNLOCK in the relevant gcc section
>>> sufficient and acceptable. It's after all the HPPA section that doesn't
>>> really play by the rules.

>> Works for me.

> Pushed something like that. Gaur has the note 'Runs infrequently' - I'm
> not sure whether that means we'll see the results anytime soon...

That means it runs when I boot it up and launch a run ;-) ... the
machine's old enough (and noisy enough) that I don't want to leave
it turned on 24x7.

I've launched a run now, expect results from gcc HEAD in an hour and
a half or so.
        regards, tom lane