* H. Peter Anvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yinghai Lu wrote: >>> which is the same. set_cpu_cap() is indeed the cleaner form to do this >>> so your patch is correct as a cleanup. >> set_cpu_cap is right >> == >> set_bit(X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC, &c->x86_capability); ===> is wrong >> should be >> set_bit(X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC, c->x86_capability); >> >> x86_capability is a array ... > > For an array, the & is optional and has no effect. > > So they mean the same thing.
yeah. It's unnecessary entropy nevertheless and i've cleaned it all up in x86.git. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/