[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53CA10FF.4050106@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 02:32:31 -0400
From: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
"open list:READ-COPY UPDATE..." <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] rcu: Check for have_rcu_nocb_mask instead of rcu_nocb_mask
On 07/19/2014 02:10 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
>> index ce8c331..8f987c1 100644
>> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
>> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
>> @@ -2053,9 +2053,10 @@ static void rcu_init_one_nocb(struct rcu_node *rnp)
>> /* Is the specified CPU a no-CBs CPU? */
>> bool rcu_is_nocb_cpu(int cpu)
>> {
>> - if (have_rcu_nocb_mask)
>> - return cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, rcu_nocb_mask);
>> - return false;
>> + if (!have_rcu_nocb_mask)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + return cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, rcu_nocb_mask);
>
> Hmmm... That was a subtle way to tell me that my feedback was bogus. ;-)
> I guess I need to stop reviewing patches at 2AM local time.
>
> Anyway, you are correct, this was OK to start with, so I am dropping
> this hunk.
>
I thought you wanted me to change the check of the have_rcu_nocb_mask, and I
really think the new version is better. But yes, more of a style change :)
--
Pranith
--
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