Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760100Ab1D1Pbw (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:31:52 -0400 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:47644 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751872Ab1D1Pbu (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:31:50 -0400 X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1 From: KOSAKI Motohiro To: Thiago Farina Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparc: convert old cpumask API into new one Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, LKML , "David S. Miller" , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <20110429001547.3D6C.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20110429003328.3D7B.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.56.05 [ja] Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:31:48 +0900 (JST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1561 Lines: 46 > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:14 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro > wrote: > > Adapt new API. Almost change is trivial, most important change are to > > remove following like =operator. > > > >  cpumask_t cpu_mask = *mm_cpumask(mm); > > Could you note that you are changing this to: > > cpumask_t cpu_mask; > cpumask_copy(&cpu_mask, mm_cpumask(mm)); > > >  cpus_allowed = current->cpus_allowed; > > And this to: > > cpumask_copy(&cpus_allowed, tsk_cpus_allowed(current)); The code explain it clearly? > > diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/of_device_64.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/of_device_64.c > > index 5c14968..3bb2eac 100644 > > --- a/arch/sparc/kernel/of_device_64.c > > +++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/of_device_64.c > > @@ -622,8 +622,9 @@ static unsigned int __init build_one_device_irq(struct platform_device *op, > >  out: > >        nid = of_node_to_nid(dp); > >        if (nid != -1) { > > -               cpumask_t numa_mask = *cpumask_of_node(nid); > > +               cpumask_t numa_mask; > > > please, could you remove the extra blank line? > > > +               cpumask_copy(&numa_mask, cpumask_of_node(nid)); > >                irq_set_affinity(irq, &numa_mask); Why? one blank line between declaration and statement is standard coding style. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/