From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 180225D473 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 14:05:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706796303; cv=none; b=NcWvkb5QjIWYYmIo2g/w/fpPEt/iBUyVDnaQQnQ+Shvxdj0ea/mEarAYLBMA2u95QUuklJl992Ohp5R34KLN0qAHLtUUyRFCdvcFn/pwXrGTRvgkkP3QPoa6Nvq4u19FxduFeEHtuNQomfevnoPgcrDHJaK8i5KbWMdlm1BP3AI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706796303; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qTbe2w2YOxtxZeFo7i+Hbfe5GUaAqTNREuYYUhZ4JRg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=qZ9tcD28OBR7Kp49ZeXqIC/54MNdHKKRTwDWh72D5hWmboYCXZ8IfZsn4L/Sk8CYcuguWLfhHkEL7gj0uttJi7vIKxOpJZd9kAzGMTJ3x80OWKXAOKFqCvck0T4EC3lYGjKDysAeAj8mVE+neQQArhX82FzJBGdepPJqqGozFUw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=GKWED4Y5; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=/aX3yW02; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="GKWED4Y5"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="/aX3yW02" From: Anna-Maria Behnsen DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1706796300; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=d8FZuGBOU1pHC+8Sc4g536Zw8P/8F9nULgyDhskpGg0=; b=GKWED4Y5w2e4gRq7iBnx5koSzwwyJjsNWO5zd2FFM+oBSEHoEr8nJWnUQgs5l39aENYsmc v7KmCZyS2IJOjB3Q12aVxWjtS0v1mytBzOW75762VayrulRES7dvVNJNQ04MGj9Q+iZlSL 8eqax6XS9Js2jo75HLDv1K42ZUgXp6wymL1BkHoB2vAmKqKqnRXWyPWzr1j3kWMVTNsqzE qJhTl5Lr8yhixo+GXetrTZTnYISBNqC960dcPG9CdkFw0mXfyc1gwNIgVgbHKbRTcttE9b 81zIJZSLDRhCFuU10X4m4OqiellpvmYRsk7vAuvDs3uxEtY21UETuaEMy2xKvA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1706796300; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=d8FZuGBOU1pHC+8Sc4g536Zw8P/8F9nULgyDhskpGg0=; b=/aX3yW0250WjiLbGFnHQ+NttUrEVcV6WbMROFki6tCxV0eAKR45LYLmyy5FEe7Qsmc1dMb HwugZRPJPEcMrfDQ== To: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: LKML , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Peng Liu , Joel Fernandes Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/15] tick: Remove useless oneshot ifdeffery In-Reply-To: References: <20240131231120.12006-1-frederic@kernel.org> <20240131231120.12006-4-frederic@kernel.org> <87ttmsikud.fsf@somnus> Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 15:04:59 +0100 Message-ID: <87il38i8l0.fsf@somnus> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Frederic Weisbecker writes: > Le Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 10:40:10AM +0100, Anna-Maria Behnsen a =C3=A9crit= : >> Frederic Weisbecker writes: >>=20 >> > tick-sched.c is only built when CONFIG_TICK_ONESHOT=3Dy, which is sele= cted >> > only if CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON=3Dy or CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS=3Dy. Therefo= re >> > the related ifdeferry in this file is needless and can be removed. >> > >> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner >> > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker >>=20 >> It's a nitpick, but shouldn't the ordering of sob and reviewed-by be the >> other way round? > > I've seen it both ways here and there, I'm not sure if there is a strict = rule > for it... > As it is for the tip maintainers, they have some rules - I don't know how strictly they are used :) Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst