[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <461B99D1.2010109@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 10:06:09 -0400
From: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
To: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@....de>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/10] I386 mcheck p4 grotesque and needless warning fix.patch
Zachary Amsden wrote:
> No, just no. You do not use goto to skip a code block. You do not
> return an obvious variable from a singly-inlined function and give
> the function a return value. You don't put unexplained comments
> about kmalloc in code which doesn't do dynamic allocation. And
> you don't leave stray warnings around for no good reason.
>
> Also, when possible, it is better to use block scoped variables
> because gcc can sometime generate better code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
>
> diff -r ed741f57dae8 arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mcheck/p4.c
> --- a/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mcheck/p4.c Fri Apr 06 14:29:52 2007 -0700
> +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mcheck/p4.c Fri Apr 06 14:43:24 2007 -0700
> @@ -124,12 +124,9 @@ static void intel_init_thermal(struct cp
>
>
> /* P4/Xeon Extended MCE MSR retrieval, return 0 if unsupported */
> -static inline int intel_get_extended_msrs(struct intel_mce_extended_msrs *r)
> +static inline void intel_get_extended_msrs(struct intel_mce_extended_msrs *r)
> {
The comment needs fixing.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists