Re: [PATCH] Staging: Android: looping issue, need break when get value firstly.

[Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>]

On 2013年04月06日 13:57, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 01:05:59PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> > On 2013年04月06日 07:48, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
>>> > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>> > >> > On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 04:05:25PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>>>>> > >>> >>
>>>>>>> > >>> >>   need break when 'target_thread' get value, firstly.
>>>>>>> > >>> >>
>>>>>>> > >>> >>     'tmp' is a stack (thread->transaction_stack),
>>>>>>> > >>> >>     if 'proc' was the same between child node and parent node,
>>>>>>> > >>> >>     the child would have higher priority than parent.
>>>>> > >> >
>>>>> > >> > Are you sure about this?
>>>>> > >> >
>>>>> > >> > have you tested it?
>>>>> > >> >
>>> > > Theoretically this should not change the behavior. The purpose of this
>>> > > code it to make sure only thread per process is part of a transaction
>>> > > stack, so if it finds more than one transaction with a matching
>>> > > process, they should all point to the same thread object. I think a
>>> > > better change description is needed though.
>> > 
>> > 
>> >   ok, thanks.
>> >   I will send patch v2 (also mark you as Signed-off).
> You can NEVER add someone else's "Signed-off-by", unless they actually
> do it (hint, that did not happen here at all.)
> 
> Please go read Documentation/SubmittingPatches again to learn exactly
> what Signed-off-by: really is (a legal agreement), it is not something
> to throw around lightly like this.
> 
>> >     (if the patch v2 still need improvement, please reply in time).
> In time for what?
> 

  ok, thanks.


> Please test these patches before you resend them.
> 

  ok, thanks, I will try to find ways to test it.


> greg k-h
> 
> 


-- 
Chen Gang

Asianux Corporation