The usage of '&' before the array parameter is redundant because '&array'
is equivalent to 'array'. Therefore, there is no need to include '&'
before the array parameter. In fact, using '&' can cause more confusion,
especially for individuals who are not familiar with the address-of
operation for arrays. They might mistakenly believe that one is different
from the other and spend additional time realizing that they are actually
the same.
Harmonizing the style by removing the unnecessary '&' would save time for
those individuals.
Signed-off-by: Wang Jinchao <[email protected]>
---
arch/x86/kernel/head64.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c
index 49f7629b17f7..25a67a13a1fa 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c
@@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ unsigned long __head __startup_64(unsigned long physaddr,
/* Fixup the physical addresses in the page table */
- pgd = fixup_pointer(&early_top_pgt, physaddr);
+ pgd = fixup_pointer(early_top_pgt, physaddr);
p = pgd + pgd_index(__START_KERNEL_map);
if (la57)
*p = (unsigned long)level4_kernel_pgt;
@@ -220,11 +220,11 @@ unsigned long __head __startup_64(unsigned long physaddr,
*p += _PAGE_TABLE_NOENC - __START_KERNEL_map + load_delta;
if (la57) {
- p4d = fixup_pointer(&level4_kernel_pgt, physaddr);
+ p4d = fixup_pointer(level4_kernel_pgt, physaddr);
p4d[511] += load_delta;
}
- pud = fixup_pointer(&level3_kernel_pgt, physaddr);
+ pud = fixup_pointer(level3_kernel_pgt, physaddr);
pud[510] += load_delta;
pud[511] += load_delta;
--
2.40.0