From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org,
linaro-networking@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 01/19] tick: trivial cleanups
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 23:23:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140422212330.GA18483@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f3f95d6a68a1d3aec3a30c2384848a06ad32459b.1398072824.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 03:24:57PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> index 6558b7a..9e9ddba 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -108,7 +108,6 @@ static ktime_t tick_init_jiffy_update(void)
> return period;
> }
>
> -
> static void tick_sched_do_timer(ktime_t now)
> {
> int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> @@ -248,8 +247,8 @@ void tick_nohz_full_kick_all(void)
> return;
>
> preempt_disable();
> - smp_call_function_many(tick_nohz_full_mask,
> - nohz_full_kick_ipi, NULL, false);
> + smp_call_function_many(tick_nohz_full_mask, nohz_full_kick_ipi, NULL,
> + false);
Breaking < 80 char lines is arguable although I'm not sure it still matters in 2014.
But I don't see much the point of the above change. I usually prefer when line contents
are a bit balanced. It may be a matter of taste I guess.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-22 21:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-21 9:54 [PATCH V2 00/19] tick: cleanups (Shouldn't change code behavior) Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:54 ` [PATCH V2 01/19] tick: trivial cleanups Viresh Kumar
2014-04-22 21:23 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2014-04-23 4:49 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:54 ` [PATCH V2 02/19] tick: update doc style comments for 'struct tick_sched' Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:54 ` [PATCH V2 03/19] tick: rearrange members of " Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 04/19] tick: move declaration of 'tick_cpu_device' to tick.h Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 05/19] tick: move definition of tick_get_device() " Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 06/19] tick: create tick_get_cpu_device() to get tick_cpu_device on this cpu Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 07/19] tick: initialize variables during their definitions Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 08/19] tick-oneshot: move tick_is_oneshot_available() to tick-oneshot.c Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 09/19] tick-oneshot: remove tick_resume_oneshot() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 10/19] tick-common: call tick_check_percpu() from tick_check_preferred() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 11/19] tick-common: remove tick_check_replacement() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 12/19] tick-common: don't pass 'cpu' & 'cpumask' to tick_setup_device() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 13/19] tick-common: remove local variable 'broadcast' from tick_resume() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 14/19] tick-sched: add comment about 'idle_active' in tick_nohz_idle_exit() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 23:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-22 4:05 ` viresh kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 15/19] tick-sched: define 'delta' inside 'if' block in update_ts_time_stats() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 16/19] tick-sched: remove parameters to {__}tick_nohz_task_switch() routines Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 17/19] tick-sched: remove local variable 'now' from tick_setup_sched_timer() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 18/19] tick-sched: invert parameter of tick_check_oneshot_change() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-21 9:55 ` [PATCH V2 19/19] tick-sched: rearrange code in tick_do_update_jiffies64() Viresh Kumar
2014-04-30 8:51 ` [PATCH V2 00/19] tick: cleanups (Shouldn't change code behavior) Viresh Kumar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140422212330.GA18483@localhost.localdomain \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linaro-networking@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).