* [PATCH] xen/arm: correct duplicate MPIDR check to actually skip the node
@ 2013-11-08 0:32 Matthew Daley
2013-11-11 16:10 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Daley @ 2013-11-08 0:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel; +Cc: Matthew Daley, Ian Campbell
Signed-off-by: Matthew Daley <mattjd@gmail.com>
---
I assume this was what was really intended...
xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c b/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
index b836be4..6c90fa6 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
@@ -161,9 +161,11 @@ void __init smp_init_cpus(void)
printk(XENLOG_WARNING
"cpu node `%s`: duplicate /cpu reg properties in the DT\n",
dt_node_full_name(cpu));
- continue;
+ break;
}
}
+ if ( j != cpuidx )
+ continue;
/*
* Build a stashed array of MPIDR values. Numbering scheme requires
--
1.7.10.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: correct duplicate MPIDR check to actually skip the node
2013-11-08 0:32 [PATCH] xen/arm: correct duplicate MPIDR check to actually skip the node Matthew Daley
@ 2013-11-11 16:10 ` Ian Campbell
2013-11-11 19:54 ` Julien Grall
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-11-11 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Daley; +Cc: Julien Grall, xen-devel
On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 13:32 +1300, Matthew Daley wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Daley <mattjd@gmail.com>
> ---
> I assume this was what was really intended...
CCing Julien... But yes it looks like it.
> xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c b/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
> index b836be4..6c90fa6 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
> @@ -161,9 +161,11 @@ void __init smp_init_cpus(void)
> printk(XENLOG_WARNING
> "cpu node `%s`: duplicate /cpu reg properties in the DT\n",
> dt_node_full_name(cpu));
> - continue;
> + break;
> }
> }
> + if ( j != cpuidx )
> + continue;
Took me a moment to figure out what this was for. I'm half minded to
suggest this is one of those places where a "goto next_cpu" would have
been ok, I'd definitely want a second opinion on that though!
>
> /*
> * Build a stashed array of MPIDR values. Numbering scheme requires
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: correct duplicate MPIDR check to actually skip the node
2013-11-11 16:10 ` Ian Campbell
@ 2013-11-11 19:54 ` Julien Grall
2013-11-19 14:53 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Julien Grall @ 2013-11-11 19:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell, Matthew Daley; +Cc: Julien Grall, xen-devel
On 11/11/2013 04:10 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 13:32 +1300, Matthew Daley wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Daley <mattjd@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> I assume this was what was really intended...
>
Indeed, that for spotting this error !
> CCing Julien... But yes it looks like it.
>
>> xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c b/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
>> index b836be4..6c90fa6 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
>> @@ -161,9 +161,11 @@ void __init smp_init_cpus(void)
>> printk(XENLOG_WARNING
>> "cpu node `%s`: duplicate /cpu reg properties in the DT\n",
>> dt_node_full_name(cpu));
>> - continue;
>> + break;
>> }
>> }
>> + if ( j != cpuidx )
>> + continue;
>
> Took me a moment to figure out what this was for. I'm half minded to
> suggest this is one of those places where a "goto next_cpu" would have
> been ok, I'd definitely want a second opinion on that though!
>
I'm happy with the both solutions:
Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
--
Julien Grall
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: correct duplicate MPIDR check to actually skip the node
2013-11-11 19:54 ` Julien Grall
@ 2013-11-19 14:53 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-11-19 14:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julien Grall; +Cc: Julien Grall, xen-devel, Matthew Daley
On Mon, 2013-11-11 at 19:54 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 11/11/2013 04:10 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 13:32 +1300, Matthew Daley wrote:
> >> Signed-off-by: Matthew Daley <mattjd@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >> I assume this was what was really intended...
> >
>
> Indeed, that for spotting this error !
>
> > CCing Julien... But yes it looks like it.
> >
> >> xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c | 4 +++-
> >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c b/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
> >> index b836be4..6c90fa6 100644
> >> --- a/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
> >> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c
> >> @@ -161,9 +161,11 @@ void __init smp_init_cpus(void)
> >> printk(XENLOG_WARNING
> >> "cpu node `%s`: duplicate /cpu reg properties in the DT\n",
> >> dt_node_full_name(cpu));
> >> - continue;
> >> + break;
> >> }
> >> }
> >> + if ( j != cpuidx )
> >> + continue;
> >
> > Took me a moment to figure out what this was for. I'm half minded to
> > suggest this is one of those places where a "goto next_cpu" would have
> > been ok, I'd definitely want a second opinion on that though!
> >
>
> I'm happy with the both solutions:
>
> Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Applied. thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-11-19 14:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-11-08 0:32 [PATCH] xen/arm: correct duplicate MPIDR check to actually skip the node Matthew Daley
2013-11-11 16:10 ` Ian Campbell
2013-11-11 19:54 ` Julien Grall
2013-11-19 14:53 ` Ian Campbell
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).