Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.34 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.34;
Date:   Wed, 20 Sep 2023 11:17:36 +0800
From:   Yu-Chien Peter Lin <peterlin@andestech.com>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
CC:     <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>, <david@redhat.com>,
        <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>,
        <bjorn@rivosinc.com>, <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] riscv: Improve PTDUMP to show RSW with non-zero
 value
Message-ID: <ZQpkUNNs6xEE_Ulw@APC323>
References: <20230914014027.273002-1-peterlin@andestech.com>
 <20230918-cassette-exclusion-b2ce53745a5c@wendy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230918-cassette-exclusion-b2ce53745a5c@wendy>
User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.10 (2023-03-25)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 01:53:13PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 09:40:25AM +0800, Yu Chien Peter Lin wrote:
> 
> > +		val = st->current_prot & pte_bits[i].mask;
> > +		if (val) {
> > +			if (pte_bits[i].mask == _PAGE_SOFT)
> > +				sprintf(s, pte_bits[i].set, val >> 8);
> > +			else
> > +				sprintf(s, "%s", pte_bits[i].set);
> > +		} else
> > +			sprintf(s, "%s", pte_bits[i].clear);
> > +
> 
> just a nit, but checkpatch in the automation is whinging that you have
> forgotten to add {} around both branches if this if statement.

Hi Conor,

Will fix the warning.

Thanks,
Peter Lin