From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754631Ab2LSKhR (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Dec 2012 05:37:17 -0500 Received: from service87.mimecast.com ([91.220.42.44]:54110 "EHLO service87.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750987Ab2LSKhM convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Dec 2012 05:37:12 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:37:08 +0000 From: Mark Rutland To: Stephen Boyd Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux@arm.linux.org.uk" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "nico@linaro.org" , Will Deacon , Marc Zyngier , "john.stultz@linaro.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] clockevents: Add generic timer broadcast function Message-ID: <20121219103708.GE32484@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1355832418-31692-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> <1355832418-31692-5-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> <50D0EB69.10901@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <50D0EB69.10901@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2012 10:37:09.0179 (UTC) FILETIME=[CC2B08B0:01CDDDD4] X-MC-Unique: 112121910371006101 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 10:17:13PM +0000, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Minor nit > > On 12/18/12 04:06, Mark Rutland wrote: > > diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > > index c2dd022..ec22a80 100644 > > --- a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > > +++ b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c > > @@ -86,6 +87,12 @@ int tick_is_broadcast_device(struct clock_event_device *dev) > > return (dev && tick_broadcast_device.evtdev == dev); > > } > > > > +static void err_broadcast(const struct cpumask *mask) > > +{ > > + pr_crit_once("Attempted to broadcast tick, but no broadcast mechanism " > > + "present. Some CPUs may be unresponsive."); > > This is missing a newline. You may also want to put the string on a > single line so we can easily grep for it in the sources. Whoops, fixed. I'll change both strings to be single line. > > @@ -105,6 +112,14 @@ int tick_device_uses_broadcast(struct clock_event_device *dev, int cpu) > > */ > > if (!tick_device_is_functional(dev)) { > > dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic; > > + if (!dev->broadcast) > > + dev->broadcast = tick_broadcast; > > + if (!dev->broadcast) { > > + pr_warn_once("%s depends on broadcast, but no " > > + "broadcast function available\n", > > Same one line comment here. I thought checkpatch didn't complain anymore. In fact it actively warns. Not sure how I missed that. Thanks, Mark.