From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752043AbaJKQ35 (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2014 12:29:57 -0400 Received: from mail-pd0-f174.google.com ([209.85.192.174]:45604 "EHLO mail-pd0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751319AbaJKQ34 (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2014 12:29:56 -0400 Message-ID: <54395B00.4070208@martingkelly.com> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 09:29:52 -0700 From: Martin Kelly User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: x86@kernel.org CC: hpa@zytor.com, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Martin Kelly Subject: Re: [PATCH] context_tracking: Fix checkpatch warnings References: <1410841232-24591-1-git-send-email-martin@martingkelly.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/25/2014 09:25 AM, Martin Kelly wrote: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Martin Kelly wrote: >> checkpatch emits several warnings for context_tracking.c, which are >> fixed in this patch: >> >> - No space after "(" >> - Lines longer than 80 characters >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Kelly >> --- >> kernel/context_tracking.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------- >> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/context_tracking.c b/kernel/context_tracking.c >> index 5664985..bf29065 100644 >> --- a/kernel/context_tracking.c >> +++ b/kernel/context_tracking.c >> @@ -54,8 +54,8 @@ void context_tracking_user_enter(void) >> /* >> * Repeat the user_enter() check here because some archs may be calling >> * this from asm and if no CPU needs context tracking, they shouldn't >> - * go further. Repeat the check here until they support the inline static >> - * key check. >> + * go further. Repeat the check here until they support the inline >> + * static key check. >> */ >> if (!context_tracking_is_enabled()) >> return; >> @@ -75,31 +75,33 @@ void context_tracking_user_enter(void) >> WARN_ON_ONCE(!current->mm); >> >> local_irq_save(flags); >> - if ( __this_cpu_read(context_tracking.state) != IN_USER) { >> + if (__this_cpu_read(context_tracking.state) != IN_USER) { >> if (__this_cpu_read(context_tracking.active)) { >> trace_user_enter(0); >> /* >> - * At this stage, only low level arch entry code remains and >> - * then we'll run in userspace. We can assume there won't be >> - * any RCU read-side critical section until the next call to >> - * user_exit() or rcu_irq_enter(). Let's remove RCU's dependency >> - * on the tick. >> + * At this stage, only low level arch entry code >> + * remains and then we'll run in userspace. We can >> + * assume there won't be any RCU read-side critical >> + * section until the next call to user_exit() or >> + * rcu_irq_enter(). Let's remove RCU's dependency on >> + * the tick. >> */ >> vtime_user_enter(current); >> rcu_user_enter(); >> } >> /* >> - * Even if context tracking is disabled on this CPU, because it's outside >> - * the full dynticks mask for example, we still have to keep track of the >> - * context transitions and states to prevent inconsistency on those of >> - * other CPUs. >> - * If a task triggers an exception in userspace, sleep on the exception >> - * handler and then migrate to another CPU, that new CPU must know where >> - * the exception returns by the time we call exception_exit(). >> - * This information can only be provided by the previous CPU when it called >> - * exception_enter(). >> - * OTOH we can spare the calls to vtime and RCU when context_tracking.active >> - * is false because we know that CPU is not tickless. >> + * Even if context tracking is disabled on this CPU, because >> + * it's outside the full dynticks mask for example, we still >> + * have to keep track of the context transitions and states to >> + * prevent inconsistency on those of other CPUs. If a task >> + * triggers an exception in userspace, sleep on the exception >> + * handler and then migrate to another CPU, that new CPU must >> + * know where the exception returns by the time we call >> + * exception_exit(). This information can only be provided by >> + * the previous CPU when it called exception_enter(). OTOH we >> + * can spare the calls to vtime and RCU when >> + * context_tracking.active is false because we know that CPU is >> + * not tickless. >> */ >> __this_cpu_write(context_tracking.state, IN_USER); >> } >> -- >> 2.1.0 >> > > (ping) > (re-ping)