[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1343706583.27983.28.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 23:49:43 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...nel.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] preempt/hardirq.h: Fix comment about PREEMPT_ACTIVE bit
location
On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 00:54 +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> PREEMPT_ACTIVE flag is bit 27, not 28. Fix the comment.
>
> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> include/linux/hardirq.h | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/hardirq.h b/include/linux/hardirq.h
> index bb7f309..305f23c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/hardirq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/hardirq.h
> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
> *
> * - bits 16-25 are the hardirq count (max # of nested hardirqs: 1024)
> * - bit 26 is the NMI_MASK
> - * - bit 28 is the PREEMPT_ACTIVE flag
> + * - bit 27 is the PREEMPT_ACTIVE flag
Sorry but in arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h we have:
#define PREEMPT_ACTIVE 0x10000000
Which happens to be the 28th bit, not 27th. Although, if an arch did not
define PREEMPT_ACTIVE it would be 27th.
Perhaps the correct thing to do is to say:
By default the following bits are defined as:
[...]
Different architectures may modify these.
And then add your change.
-- Steve
> *
> * PREEMPT_MASK: 0x000000ff
> * SOFTIRQ_MASK: 0x0000ff00
--
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