On 04/24/17 at 05:04pm, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Hi Baoquan,
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 05:00:40PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> > Hi Fengguang,
> >
> > Thanks for pointing it out!
> >
> > I am fine with defining mem_avoid_memmap_index it as static variable.
> > While Liyang suggested using a local static inside mem_avoid_memmap,
> > then mem_avoid_memmap_index is not needed any more. Do you think it's OK
> > to you?
>
> Yes, that'd be a better solution. It's a robot generated patch and is
> open for optimization or correction.
Oh, the tip robot is so great! Thanks for telling, then let me repost.
>
> > On 04/24/17 at 04:48pm, kbuild test robot wrote:
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang...@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > kaslr.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> > > b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> > > index 6649ecd..7190d35 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> > > @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ struct mem_vector {
> > > #define MAX_MEMMAP_REGIONS 4
> > >
> > > static bool memmap_too_large;
> > > -int mem_avoid_memmap_index;
> > > +static int mem_avoid_memmap_index;
> > > extern unsigned long get_cmd_line_ptr(void);
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > kbuild-all mailing list
> > kbuild-...@lists.01.org
> > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/kbuild-all
