[patch] x86: Unneeded assignment to tsk in recent x86 change, v2

[patch] x86: Unneeded assignment to tsk in recent x86 change, v2

[Uros Bizjak]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 837 bytes --]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@it.uu.se> wrote:

Impact: Cleanup.

Remove unneeded assignment to tsk in recent x86 change.

>  > Hm, I'm not sure I see the inconsistency here. Care to explain this
>  > inconsistency in a couple of words?
>
> You're initialising some variables in their declarations, and some
> using assignments at the start of the procedure body. In particular,
> for some reason you don't initialise 'mm' in its declaration even
> though you could do so for consistency with 'tsk'.
>
> However, I'm strongly in favour of separating declarations and
> initialisations (esp. ones that need actual computations), so
> rather than subjecting 'mm' to the treatment you gave 'tsk',
> just leave the code alone.
>

Patch v2 with the second hunk removed is attached to this message.

Thanks,
Uros.

[-- Attachment #2: p.diff.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 447 bytes --]

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
index 93a563b..621e9b3 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
@@ -421,7 +421,6 @@ static noinline void pgtable_bad(struct pt_regs *regs,
 	printk(KERN_ALERT "%s: Corrupted page table at address %lx\n",
 	       tsk->comm, address);
 	dump_pagetable(address);
-	tsk = current;
 	tsk->thread.cr2 = address;
 	tsk->thread.trap_no = 14;
 	tsk->thread.error_code = error_code;

Re: [patch] x86: Unneeded assignment to tsk in recent x86 change, v2

[Mikael Pettersson]

Uros Bizjak writes:
 > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@it.uu.se> wrote:
 > 
 > Impact: Cleanup.
 > 
 > Remove unneeded assignment to tsk in recent x86 change.
 > 
 > >  > Hm, I'm not sure I see the inconsistency here. Care to explain this
 > >  > inconsistency in a couple of words?
 > >
 > > You're initialising some variables in their declarations, and some
 > > using assignments at the start of the procedure body. In particular,
 > > for some reason you don't initialise 'mm' in its declaration even
 > > though you could do so for consistency with 'tsk'.
 > >
 > > However, I'm strongly in favour of separating declarations and
 > > initialisations (esp. ones that need actual computations), so
 > > rather than subjecting 'mm' to the treatment you gave 'tsk',
 > > just leave the code alone.
 > >
 > 
 > Patch v2 with the second hunk removed is attached to this message.
 > 
 > Thanks,
 > Uros.
 > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
 > index 93a563b..621e9b3 100644
 > --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
 > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
 > @@ -421,7 +421,6 @@ static noinline void pgtable_bad(struct pt_regs *regs,
 >  	printk(KERN_ALERT "%s: Corrupted page table at address %lx\n",
 >  	       tsk->comm, address);
 >  	dump_pagetable(address);
 > -	tsk = current;
 >  	tsk->thread.cr2 = address;
 >  	tsk->thread.trap_no = 14;
 >  	tsk->thread.error_code = error_code;

ACKed, but an equivalent patch from Johannes Weiner has already been committed
to the x86 git tree.