From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd) Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:17:13 -0800 Subject: [RFC PATCH 4/5] clockevents: Add generic timer broadcast function In-Reply-To: <1355832418-31692-5-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> References: <1355832418-31692-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> <1355832418-31692-5-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> Message-ID: <50D0EB69.10901@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Minor nit On 12/18/12 04:06, Mark Rutland wrote: > diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > index c2dd022..ec22a80 100644 > --- a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > +++ b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > @@ -86,6 +87,12 @@ int tick_is_broadcast_device(struct clock_event_device *dev) > return (dev && tick_broadcast_device.evtdev == dev); > } > > +static void err_broadcast(const struct cpumask *mask) > +{ > + pr_crit_once("Attempted to broadcast tick, but no broadcast mechanism " > + "present. Some CPUs may be unresponsive."); This is missing a newline. You may also want to put the string on a single line so we can easily grep for it in the sources. > @@ -105,6 +112,14 @@ int tick_device_uses_broadcast(struct clock_event_device *dev, int cpu) > */ > if (!tick_device_is_functional(dev)) { > dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic; > + if (!dev->broadcast) > + dev->broadcast = tick_broadcast; > + if (!dev->broadcast) { > + pr_warn_once("%s depends on broadcast, but no " > + "broadcast function available\n", Same one line comment here. I thought checkpatch didn't complain anymore. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755489Ab2LRWRP (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2012 17:17:15 -0500 Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.251]:34041 "EHLO wolverine02.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755451Ab2LRWRO (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2012 17:17:14 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,311,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="15096557" Message-ID: <50D0EB69.10901@codeaurora.org> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:17:13 -0800 From: Stephen Boyd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Rutland CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, tglx@linutronix.de, nico@linaro.org, will.deacon@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, john.stultz@linaro.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] clockevents: Add generic timer broadcast function References: <1355832418-31692-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> <1355832418-31692-5-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <1355832418-31692-5-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Minor nit On 12/18/12 04:06, Mark Rutland wrote: > diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > index c2dd022..ec22a80 100644 > --- a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > +++ b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > @@ -86,6 +87,12 @@ int tick_is_broadcast_device(struct clock_event_device *dev) > return (dev && tick_broadcast_device.evtdev == dev); > } > > +static void err_broadcast(const struct cpumask *mask) > +{ > + pr_crit_once("Attempted to broadcast tick, but no broadcast mechanism " > + "present. Some CPUs may be unresponsive."); This is missing a newline. You may also want to put the string on a single line so we can easily grep for it in the sources. > @@ -105,6 +112,14 @@ int tick_device_uses_broadcast(struct clock_event_device *dev, int cpu) > */ > if (!tick_device_is_functional(dev)) { > dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic; > + if (!dev->broadcast) > + dev->broadcast = tick_broadcast; > + if (!dev->broadcast) { > + pr_warn_once("%s depends on broadcast, but no " > + "broadcast function available\n", Same one line comment here. I thought checkpatch didn't complain anymore. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation