Re: [PATCH 8/8] x86/setup.c: use plain bool

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>]

On 28/06/17 15:57, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 03:26:18PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 28/06/17 15:18, Wei Liu wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
>>> ---
>>>  xen/arch/x86/setup.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
>>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>>> index f7b927858c..db5df6956d 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>>> @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@
>>>  #include <asm/cpuid.h>
>>>  
>>>  /* opt_nosmp: If true, secondary processors are ignored. */
>>> -static bool_t __initdata opt_nosmp;
>>> +static bool __initdata opt_nosmp;
>>>  boolean_param("nosmp", opt_nosmp);
>>>  
>>>  /* maxcpus: maximum number of CPUs to activate. */
>>> @@ -151,8 +151,8 @@ static void __init parse_smap_param(char *s)
>>>  }
>>>  custom_param("smap", parse_smap_param);
>>>  
>>> -bool_t __read_mostly acpi_disabled;
>>> -bool_t __initdata acpi_force;
>>> +bool __read_mostly acpi_disabled;
>>> +bool __initdata acpi_force;
>> Prototypes?
>>
> I discovered that these are declared in asm-x86/acpi.h, which is also
> ripe for similar cleanup. For now I only change the two variables
> touched in this patch to bool. Further cleanup to x86/acpi will deal
> with the rest.

Ok fine.  My R-by can stand.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel