All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <1366843096.17465.17@snotra>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 3349975..c4da922 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -40,58 +40,58 @@ On 04/24/2013 06:29:29 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote:
 > > > 	u32 mask;
 > > > 	int cpu;
 > > >
-> > >-	mask =3D 1 << cur_booting_core;
+> > >-	mask = 1 << cur_booting_core;
 > > >-	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
-> > >-		mask |=3D 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu);
+> > >-		mask |= 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu);
 > > >+	if (smt_capable()) {
 > > >+		/* two threads in one core share one time base */
-> > >+		mask =3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(cur_booting_core);
+> > >+		mask = 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(cur_booting_core);
 > > >+		for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
-> > >+			mask |=3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(
+> > >+			mask |= 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(
 > > >+					get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu));
 > > >+	} else {
-> > >+		mask =3D 1 << cur_booting_core;
+> > >+		mask = 1 << cur_booting_core;
 > > >+		for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
-> > >+			mask |=3D 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu);
+> > >+			mask |= 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu);
 > > >+	}
 > >
 > > Where is smt_capable defined()?  I assume somewhere in the patchset
 > > but it's a pain to search 12 patches...
 > >
->=20
+> 
 > It is defined in arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h.
 > 	#define smt_capable()           (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_SMT))
->=20
+> 
 > Thanks for your review again.
 
-We shouldn't base it on CPU_FTR_SMT.  For example, e6500 doesn't claim =20
-that feature yet, except in our SDK kernel.  That doesn't change the =20
+We shouldn't base it on CPU_FTR_SMT.  For example, e6500 doesn't claim  
+that feature yet, except in our SDK kernel.  That doesn't change the  
 topology of CPU numbering.
 
 > > Is this really about whether we're SMT-capable or whether we have
 > > rcpm v2?
 > >
 > > -Scott
->=20
-> I think this "if" statement can be removed. The =20
+> 
+> I think this "if" statement can be removed. The  
 > cpu_core_index_of_thread()
 > can return the correct cpu number with thread or without thread.
->=20
+> 
 > Like this:
 > static inline u32 get_phy_cpu_mask(void)
 > {
 > 	u32 mask;
 > 	int cpu;
->=20
-> 	mask =3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(cur_booting_core);
+> 
+> 	mask = 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(cur_booting_core);
 > 	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
-> 		mask |=3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(
+> 		mask |= 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(
 > 				get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu));
->=20
+> 
 > 	return mask;
 > }
 
-Likewise, this will get it wrong if SMT is disabled or not yet =20
+Likewise, this will get it wrong if SMT is disabled or not yet  
 implemented on a core.
 
--Scott=
+-Scott
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 9cd6f88..4d0f4db 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -3,9 +3,9 @@
  "Subject\0Re: [PATCH v2 12/15] powerpc/85xx: add time base sync support for e6500\0"
  "Date\0Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:38:16 -0500\0"
  "To\0Zhao Chenhui <chenhui.zhao@freescale.com>\0"
- "Cc\0linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org"
-  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
- " r58472@freescale.com\0"
+ "Cc\0<linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>"
+  <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
+ " <r58472@freescale.com>\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On 04/24/2013 06:29:29 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote:\n"
@@ -50,60 +50,60 @@
  "> > > \tu32 mask;\n"
  "> > > \tint cpu;\n"
  "> > >\n"
- "> > >-\tmask =3D 1 << cur_booting_core;\n"
+ "> > >-\tmask = 1 << cur_booting_core;\n"
  "> > >-\tfor_each_online_cpu(cpu)\n"
- "> > >-\t\tmask |=3D 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu);\n"
+ "> > >-\t\tmask |= 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu);\n"
  "> > >+\tif (smt_capable()) {\n"
  "> > >+\t\t/* two threads in one core share one time base */\n"
- "> > >+\t\tmask =3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(cur_booting_core);\n"
+ "> > >+\t\tmask = 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(cur_booting_core);\n"
  "> > >+\t\tfor_each_online_cpu(cpu)\n"
- "> > >+\t\t\tmask |=3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(\n"
+ "> > >+\t\t\tmask |= 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(\n"
  "> > >+\t\t\t\t\tget_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu));\n"
  "> > >+\t} else {\n"
- "> > >+\t\tmask =3D 1 << cur_booting_core;\n"
+ "> > >+\t\tmask = 1 << cur_booting_core;\n"
  "> > >+\t\tfor_each_online_cpu(cpu)\n"
- "> > >+\t\t\tmask |=3D 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu);\n"
+ "> > >+\t\t\tmask |= 1 << get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu);\n"
  "> > >+\t}\n"
  "> >\n"
  "> > Where is smt_capable defined()?  I assume somewhere in the patchset\n"
  "> > but it's a pain to search 12 patches...\n"
  "> >\n"
- ">=20\n"
+ "> \n"
  "> It is defined in arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h.\n"
  "> \t#define smt_capable()           (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_SMT))\n"
- ">=20\n"
+ "> \n"
  "> Thanks for your review again.\n"
  "\n"
- "We shouldn't base it on CPU_FTR_SMT.  For example, e6500 doesn't claim =20\n"
- "that feature yet, except in our SDK kernel.  That doesn't change the =20\n"
+ "We shouldn't base it on CPU_FTR_SMT.  For example, e6500 doesn't claim  \n"
+ "that feature yet, except in our SDK kernel.  That doesn't change the  \n"
  "topology of CPU numbering.\n"
  "\n"
  "> > Is this really about whether we're SMT-capable or whether we have\n"
  "> > rcpm v2?\n"
  "> >\n"
  "> > -Scott\n"
- ">=20\n"
- "> I think this \"if\" statement can be removed. The =20\n"
+ "> \n"
+ "> I think this \"if\" statement can be removed. The  \n"
  "> cpu_core_index_of_thread()\n"
  "> can return the correct cpu number with thread or without thread.\n"
- ">=20\n"
+ "> \n"
  "> Like this:\n"
  "> static inline u32 get_phy_cpu_mask(void)\n"
  "> {\n"
  "> \tu32 mask;\n"
  "> \tint cpu;\n"
- ">=20\n"
- "> \tmask =3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(cur_booting_core);\n"
+ "> \n"
+ "> \tmask = 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(cur_booting_core);\n"
  "> \tfor_each_online_cpu(cpu)\n"
- "> \t\tmask |=3D 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(\n"
+ "> \t\tmask |= 1 << cpu_core_index_of_thread(\n"
  "> \t\t\t\tget_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu));\n"
- ">=20\n"
+ "> \n"
  "> \treturn mask;\n"
  "> }\n"
  "\n"
- "Likewise, this will get it wrong if SMT is disabled or not yet =20\n"
+ "Likewise, this will get it wrong if SMT is disabled or not yet  \n"
  "implemented on a core.\n"
  "\n"
- -Scott=
+ -Scott
 
-0e8168ba95e4dd2a0a0a06384efcc81fd26b933fcf7f9738f284b19106f39d58
+b505f845ff26015fbeea412703e51fd9da98603d146fa6f80d49b94d4e3eaeab

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.