* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > set_cpu_cap is right
> > ==
> > set_bit(X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC, &c->x86_capability); ===> is wrong
> > should be
> > set_bit(X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC, c->x86_capability);
> >
> > x86_capability is a array ...
> >
> > so this could prevent some data corruption.
>
> ah, right you are! [...]
actually, not: &c->x86_capability and c->x86_capability result in the
same address (it's an array, not a pointer), so there's no "data
corruption". If x86_capability were a pointer then you would be right -
so this is all worth cleaning up.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
