From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruno Ducrot Subject: Re: Possible CPUFreq governor Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:02:57 +0200 Message-ID: <20050427110257.GY2298@poupinou.org> References: <53866.130.127.49.120.1114558769.squirrel@130.127.49.120> <20050427105350.GX2298@poupinou.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050427105350.GX2298@poupinou.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cpufreq-bounces@lists.linux.org.uk Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=m.gmane.org@lists.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Mark Bidewell Cc: cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:53:50PM +0200, Bruno Ducrot wrote: > #define __set_task_state(tsk, state_value) \ > - do { (tsk)->state = (state_value); } while (0) > -#define set_task_state(tsk, state_value) \ > - set_mb((tsk)->state, (state_value)) > > Look a little bit more the macro you just removed here. > Its expected to return a value, namely 'state_value'. Oops, its me that need to read this more carrefully.. Sorry. -- Bruno Ducrot -- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? -- Don't know. Don't care.