2009-01-22 07:34:16

by Uros Bizjak

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [patch] x86: Unneeded assignment to tsk in recent x86 change, v2

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Mikael Pettersson <[email protected]> wrote:

Impact: Cleanup.

Remove unneeded assignment to tsk in recent x86 change.

> > Hm, I'm not sure I see the inconsistency here. Care to explain this
> > inconsistency in a couple of words?
>
> You're initialising some variables in their declarations, and some
> using assignments at the start of the procedure body. In particular,
> for some reason you don't initialise 'mm' in its declaration even
> though you could do so for consistency with 'tsk'.
>
> However, I'm strongly in favour of separating declarations and
> initialisations (esp. ones that need actual computations), so
> rather than subjecting 'mm' to the treatment you gave 'tsk',
> just leave the code alone.
>

Patch v2 with the second hunk removed is attached to this message.

Thanks,
Uros.


Attachments:
p.diff.txt (447.00 B)

2009-01-23 13:46:19

by Mikael Pettersson

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch] x86: Unneeded assignment to tsk in recent x86 change, v2

Uros Bizjak writes:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Mikael Pettersson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Impact: Cleanup.
>
> Remove unneeded assignment to tsk in recent x86 change.
>
> > > Hm, I'm not sure I see the inconsistency here. Care to explain this
> > > inconsistency in a couple of words?
> >
> > You're initialising some variables in their declarations, and some
> > using assignments at the start of the procedure body. In particular,
> > for some reason you don't initialise 'mm' in its declaration even
> > though you could do so for consistency with 'tsk'.
> >
> > However, I'm strongly in favour of separating declarations and
> > initialisations (esp. ones that need actual computations), so
> > rather than subjecting 'mm' to the treatment you gave 'tsk',
> > just leave the code alone.
> >
>
> Patch v2 with the second hunk removed is attached to this message.
>
> Thanks,
> Uros.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> index 93a563b..621e9b3 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> @@ -421,7 +421,6 @@ static noinline void pgtable_bad(struct pt_regs *regs,
> printk(KERN_ALERT "%s: Corrupted page table at address %lx\n",
> tsk->comm, address);
> dump_pagetable(address);
> - tsk = current;
> tsk->thread.cr2 = address;
> tsk->thread.trap_no = 14;
> tsk->thread.error_code = error_code;

ACKed, but an equivalent patch from Johannes Weiner has already been committed
to the x86 git tree.