Delete waste '{' for 'case' statement.
For the return variable 'long res' in function kdb_task_state_string(),
neither it matches the function return type 'unsigned long', nor is
suitable as a flag variable to make 'or' operation. So use 'unsigned
long' instead of 'long'.
If "case 'A'" happen in function kdb_task_state_string(), can return
~0UL directly to save the useless looping.
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <[email protected]>
---
kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c | 3 ---
kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_support.c | 5 ++---
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
index 00eb8f7..62a0d4a 100644
--- a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
+++ b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c
@@ -1151,7 +1151,6 @@ static int kdb_local(kdb_reason_t reason, int error, struct pt_regs *regs,
switch (reason) {
case KDB_REASON_DEBUG:
- {
/*
* If re-entering kdb after a single step
* command, don't print the message.
@@ -1176,8 +1175,6 @@ static int kdb_local(kdb_reason_t reason, int error, struct pt_regs *regs,
db_result);
break;
}
-
- }
break;
case KDB_REASON_ENTER:
if (KDB_STATE(KEYBOARD))
diff --git a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_support.c b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_support.c
index d35cc2d..75377d1 100644
--- a/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_support.c
+++ b/kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_support.c
@@ -560,7 +560,7 @@ int kdb_putword(unsigned long addr, unsigned long word, size_t size)
unsigned long kdb_task_state_string(const char *s)
{
- long res = 0;
+ unsigned long res = 0;
if (!s) {
s = kdbgetenv("PS");
if (!s)
@@ -599,8 +599,7 @@ unsigned long kdb_task_state_string(const char *s)
res |= DAEMON;
break;
case 'A':
- res = ~0UL;
- break;
+ return ~0UL;
default:
kdb_printf("%s: unknown flag '%c' ignored\n",
__func__, *s);
--
1.7.7.6
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 07:25:46PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> Delete waste '{' for 'case' statement.
>
> For the return variable 'long res' in function kdb_task_state_string(),
> neither it matches the function return type 'unsigned long', nor is
> suitable as a flag variable to make 'or' operation. So use 'unsigned
> long' instead of 'long'.
>
> If "case 'A'" happen in function kdb_task_state_string(), can return
> ~0UL directly to save the useless looping.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <[email protected]>
If anything, these should be 3 separate patches...
Thanks!
Anton
On 05/24/2013 01:28 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 07:25:46PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> > Delete waste '{' for 'case' statement.
>> >
>> > For the return variable 'long res' in function kdb_task_state_string(),
>> > neither it matches the function return type 'unsigned long', nor is
>> > suitable as a flag variable to make 'or' operation. So use 'unsigned
>> > long' instead of 'long'.
>> >
>> > If "case 'A'" happen in function kdb_task_state_string(), can return
>> > ~0UL directly to save the useless looping.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <[email protected]>
> If anything, these should be 3 separate patches...
>
OK, I will separate them into 3 patches (originally, I think for trivial
cleanup patches, better let them in one patch, so can save the reviewers
and appliers time)
Excuse me, I have to do something else, so I will finish them within
this month (2013-05-31)
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
On 05/24/2013 09:18 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 05/24/2013 01:28 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 07:25:46PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>> >> > Delete waste '{' for 'case' statement.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > For the return variable 'long res' in function kdb_task_state_string(),
>>>> >> > neither it matches the function return type 'unsigned long', nor is
>>>> >> > suitable as a flag variable to make 'or' operation. So use 'unsigned
>>>> >> > long' instead of 'long'.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > If "case 'A'" happen in function kdb_task_state_string(), can return
>>>> >> > ~0UL directly to save the useless looping.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <[email protected]>
>> > If anything, these should be 3 separate patches...
>> >
My original 3 fix issues old patches for "kernel/debug" are still
non-reply, then the new minor cleanup patches (if I will provide the 3
patches) will of cause be none-reply, too.
Now, I am not a newbie anymore, so I can/should understand it, at least,
it should not stop me to continue providing patches to another members.
And thank you for your encouraging.
:-)
> OK, I will separate them into 3 patches (originally, I think for trivial
> cleanup patches, better let them in one patch, so can save the reviewers
> and appliers time)
>
> Excuse me, I have to do something else, so I will finish them within
> this month (2013-05-31)
>
>
> Thanks.
> -- Chen Gang Asianux Corporation
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation