[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87r0xaw6fh.fsf@all.your.base.are.belong.to.us>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 11:12:02 +0100
From: Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org>
To: guoren@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, guoren@...nel.org,
palmer@...osinc.com, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
luto@...nel.org, conor.dooley@...rochip.com, heiko@...ech.de,
jszhang@...nel.org, lazyparser@...il.com, falcon@...ylab.org,
chenhuacai@...nel.org, apatel@...tanamicro.com,
atishp@...shpatra.org, palmer@...belt.com,
paul.walmsley@...ive.com, mark.rutland@....com,
zouyipeng@...wei.com, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
David.Laight@...lab.com, chenzhongjin@...wei.com,
greentime.hu@...ive.com, andy.chiu@...ive.com, ben@...adent.org.uk
Cc: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next V10 06/10] riscv: entry: Consolidate
ret_from_kernel_thread into ret_from_fork
guoren@...nel.org writes:
> From: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>
>
> The ret_from_kernel_thread() behaves similarly with ret_from_fork(),
> the only difference is whether call the fn(arg) or not, this can be
> achieved by testing fn is NULL or not, I.E s0 is 0 or not. Many
> architectures have done the same thing, it make entry.S more clean.
Nit: "it makes".
Björn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists