[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <877djwdorz.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 17:50:40 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Nitesh Lal <nilal@...hat.com>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Frank Li <Frank.li@....com>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
Shaokun Zhang <zhangshaokun@...ilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 5/8] perf/arm-dsu: Use irq_set_affinity()
On Tue, May 18 2021 at 12:31, John Garry wrote:
> On 18/05/2021 10:17, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>> @@ -769,7 +769,6 @@ static int dsu_pmu_device_probe(struct p
>> if (rc) {
>
> nit: I think that someone will send a patch to remove these {} later...
>
>> cpuhp_state_remove_instance(dsu_pmu_cpuhp_state,
>> &dsu_pmu->cpuhp_node);
>> - irq_set_affinity_hint(dsu_pmu->irq, NULL);
>> }
which should be rejected because
cpuhp_state_remove_instance(dsu_pmu_cpuhp_state,
&dsu_pmu->cpuhp_node);
is _NOT_ a one line statement.
if (foo)
cpuhp_state_remove_instance(state, &node);
is fine, but
if (foo)
cpuhp_state_remove_instance(dsu_pmu_cpuhp_state,
&dsu_pmu->cpuhp_node);
breaks the expectation of a single line following the condition which
confuses my brain based OCR. :)
So I left the brackets there on purpose.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists