This fixes "ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible"
Signed-off-by: Jia He
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman
---
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/rf.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/rf.c
b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/
This fixes space missing problems,eg. before '-', after ',', around
'|'
Signed-off-by: Jia He
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman
---
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/bb_cfg.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/fw.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/phy.c| 2 +-
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu
This fixes all coding style error problems at rtl8188eu which
makes checkpatch.pl unhappy
Jia He (2):
staging: rtl8188eu: Fix coding style space missing problems
staging: rtl8188eu: Fix coding style not using tab problem
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/bb_cfg.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging
Signed-off-by: Jia He
This fixes all coding style error problems at rtl8188eu which
makes checkpatch.pl unhappy
---
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/bb_cfg.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/fw.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/phy.c| 2 +-
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/rf.c
Signed-off-by: Jia He hejia...@gmail.com
This fixes all coding style error problems at rtl8188eu which
makes checkpatch.pl unhappy
---
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/bb_cfg.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/fw.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/phy.c| 2 +-
drivers/staging
This fixes space missing problems,eg. before '-', after ',', around
'|'
Signed-off-by: Jia He hejia...@gmail.com
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman gre...@linuxfoundation.org
---
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/bb_cfg.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/fw.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal
This fixes all coding style error problems at rtl8188eu which
makes checkpatch.pl unhappy
Jia He (2):
staging: rtl8188eu: Fix coding style space missing problems
staging: rtl8188eu: Fix coding style not using tab problem
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/bb_cfg.c | 4 ++--
drivers/staging
This fixes ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible
Signed-off-by: Jia He hejia...@gmail.com
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman gre...@linuxfoundation.org
---
drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/rf.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/rf.c
b
Tested-by: Jia He
# cat /proc/sysvipc/sem
key semid perms nsems uid gid cuid cgid otime
ctime
-1 32768 666 1 0 0 0 0 1380185570
1380185570
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 07:08:55 +0200 from manf...@colorfullife.com wrote:
> Hi
semops do not update sem_otime
anymore.
The fix is simple:
Non-alter operations must update sem_otime.
Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul manf...@colorfullife.com
Reported-by: Jia He jiaker...@gmail.com
---
ipc/sem.c | 41 +
1 file changed, 29 insertions
> Hi Jia,
>
> On 09/25/2013 05:05 AM, Jia He wrote:
>> Hi Manfred
>> IIUC after reivewing your patch and src code, does it seem
>> sem_otime lost the chance to be updated when calling
>> semctl_main/semctl_setval?
>> In old codes, even whendo_smart_update(sma,
/25/2013 05:05 AM, Jia He wrote:
Hi Manfred
IIUC after reivewing your patch and src code, does it seem
sem_otime lost the chance to be updated when calling
semctl_main/semctl_setval?
In old codes, even whendo_smart_update(sma, NULL, 0, 0, tasks),
the otime can be updated after several
:33 +0200 from manf...@colorfullife.com wrote:
> On 09/22/2013 05:14 PM, Jia He wrote:
>> Hi Manfred
>>
>> On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:42:05 +0200 from manf...@colorfullife.com wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> On 09/22/2013 10:26 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>&g
:09:33 +0200 from manf...@colorfullife.com wrote:
On 09/22/2013 05:14 PM, Jia He wrote:
Hi Manfred
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:42:05 +0200 from manf...@colorfullife.com wrote:
Hi all,
On 09/22/2013 10:26 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:17 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sun
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 03:08:36 +0200 from bitbuc...@online.de wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 12:42 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>
>> Mike: no, your patch makes it worse:
>> - wait-for-zero semops still don't update sem_otime
>> - sem_otime is initialized to sem_ctime. That's not mentioned in the
Hi Manfred
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:42:05 +0200 from manf...@colorfullife.com wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On 09/22/2013 10:26 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:17 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:11 +0800, Jia He wrote:
>>&g
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:42:05 +0200 from manf...@colorfullife.com wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On 09/22/2013 10:26 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:17 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:11 +0800, Jia He wrote:
>>>> In commi
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:00:21 +0200 from bitbuc...@online.de wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 17:34 +0800, Jia He wrote:
>> Thanks for the comments, but pls add my email as "from jiaker...@gmail.com"
>> if you have a better implementation.U know, it is my firs
un, 2013-09-22 at 10:11 +0800, Jia He wrote:
>>> In commit 0a2b9d4c,the update of semaphore's sem_otime(last semop time)
>>> was removed because he wanted to move setting sem->sem_otime to one
>>> place. But after that, the initial semop() will not set the otime
>
will record the last sem operation time of semop. If you change the
otime in semget(), it changes the meanings in stardard, doesn't it?
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 10:26:04 +0200 from bitbuc...@online.de wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:17 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:11 +0800, Jia He
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:00:21 +0200 from bitbuc...@online.de wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 17:34 +0800, Jia He wrote:
Thanks for the comments, but pls add my email as from jiaker...@gmail.com
if you have a better implementation.U know, it is my first kernel patch,
maybe
will give me
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:42:05 +0200 from manf...@colorfullife.com wrote:
Hi all,
On 09/22/2013 10:26 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:17 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:11 +0800, Jia He wrote:
In commit 0a2b9d4c,the update of semaphore's sem_otime
Hi Manfred
On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:42:05 +0200 from manf...@colorfullife.com wrote:
Hi all,
On 09/22/2013 10:26 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:17 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 10:11 +0800, Jia He wrote:
In commit 0a2b9d4c,the update of semaphore's
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 03:08:36 +0200 from bitbuc...@online.de wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 12:42 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Mike: no, your patch makes it worse:
- wait-for-zero semops still don't update sem_otime
- sem_otime is initialized to sem_ctime. That's not mentioned in the
sysv
ly\n");
return 0;
}
the steps to test:
touch /tmp/my_sem
./server &
sleep 1
./client &
With the patch
1.test output:
error in opening a existed sem
2.cat /proc/sysvipc/sem
the field sem_otime is always zero
Without this patch
1.test output:
open exsited sem sucessfully
2.cat /proc/s
:
error in opening a existed sem
2.cat /proc/sysvipc/sem
the field sem_otime is always zero
Without this patch
1.test output:
open exsited sem sucessfully
2.cat /proc/sysvipc/sem
the field sem_otime is not zero
Signed-off-by: Jia He jiaker...@gmail.com
---
ipc/sem.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1
601 - 626 of 626 matches
Mail list logo
