[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090408114038.GB14687@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 13:40:38 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, hpa@...or.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/4] x86: MCE: Make polling timer interval per CPU
On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 08:30:45PM +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >>> + if (!*n)
> >>> + *n = check_interval * HZ;
> >>> + if (!*n)
> >>> return;
> >
> > The !*n will return for check_interval == 0 because 0*HZ is still 0 so it should be
> > equivalent. Did I miss something?
>
> At First, *n is 0 on boot.
> And then soon it will be initialized to non-zero (check_interval * HZ)
> by the first if-statement.
>
> After that if check_interval is changed via sysfs while *n is non-zero,
> which if-statement runs?
Ok got your point now. The first if (!*n) needs to be dropped indeed.
Will respin that patch.
Thanks.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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