From 8d43724087b20a6167fe1a178f965012d75efc7e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ben Blum Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 13:24:00 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] minor rt cleanup --- src/rt/rust_task.cpp | 9 --------- src/rt/rust_task.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/rt/rust_task.cpp b/src/rt/rust_task.cpp index ab07f317550..b2f7538b628 100644 --- a/src/rt/rust_task.cpp +++ b/src/rt/rust_task.cpp @@ -574,15 +574,6 @@ sp_in_stk_seg(uintptr_t sp, stk_seg *stk) { return (uintptr_t)stk->data <= sp && sp <= stk->end; } -struct reset_args { - rust_task *task; - uintptr_t sp; -}; - -void -reset_stack_limit_on_c_stack(reset_args *args) { -} - /* Called by landing pads during unwinding to figure out which stack segment we are currently running on and record the stack limit (which was not restored diff --git a/src/rt/rust_task.h b/src/rt/rust_task.h index 3b8e78cf1dd..10419686d48 100644 --- a/src/rt/rust_task.h +++ b/src/rt/rust_task.h @@ -433,7 +433,7 @@ rust_task::call_on_rust_stack(void *args, void *fn_ptr) { bool had_reentered_rust_stack = reentered_rust_stack; { - // FIXME (#2875) This must be racy. Figure it out. + // FIXME (#1868) This must be racy. Figure it out. scoped_lock with(lifecycle_lock); reentered_rust_stack = true; }