On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 10:17:13PM +0000, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Minor nit
>
> On 12/18/12 04:06, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c
> > index c2dd022..ec22a80 100644
> > --- a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c
> > +++ b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c
> > @@ -86,6 +87,12 @@ int tick_is_broadcast_device(struct clock_event_device
> > *dev)
> > return (dev && tick_broadcast_device.evtdev == dev);
> > }
> >
> > +static void err_broadcast(const struct cpumask *mask)
> > +{
> > + pr_crit_once("Attempted to broadcast tick, but no broadcast mechanism "
> > + "present. Some CPUs may be unresponsive.");
>
> This is missing a newline. You may also want to put the string on a
> single line so we can easily grep for it in the sources.
Whoops, fixed. I'll change both strings to be single line.
> > @@ -105,6 +112,14 @@ int tick_device_uses_broadcast(struct
> > clock_event_device *dev, int cpu)
> > */
> > if (!tick_device_is_functional(dev)) {
> > dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic;
> > + if (!dev->broadcast)
> > + dev->broadcast = tick_broadcast;
> > + if (!dev->broadcast) {
> > + pr_warn_once("%s depends on broadcast, but no "
> > + "broadcast function available\n",
>
> Same one line comment here. I thought checkpatch didn't complain anymore.
In fact it actively warns. Not sure how I missed that.
Thanks,
Mark.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
