On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 09:15:33AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
[...]
> Meanwhile, I think it's still worthwhile to go through the patch even
> it's from cocinelle since sometimes coccinelle might do something that
> we (or only me?) didn't expect. E.g., afaik it cannot handle well with
> over-80-chars
On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 06:02:49PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> 2017-02-28 15:40+0800, Peter Xu:
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 03:34:24PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> > diff --git a/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c
> >> > index ee4af898bcf6..552ae2b5e911 100644
> >
2017-02-28 15:40+0800, Peter Xu:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 03:34:24PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> > diff --git a/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c
>> > index ee4af898bcf6..552ae2b5e911 100644
>> > --- a/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c
>> > +++ b/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c
>> > @@ -
2017-02-27 11:18+0100, David Hildenbrand:
> Am 27.02.2017 um 11:02 schrieb David Hildenbrand:
>> Am 24.02.2017 um 20:49 schrieb Radim Krčmář:
>>> The leading underscores denote that the call is just a bitop wrapper.
>>
>> Actually, the leading underscore is misleading
>>
>> If we want to match th
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 03:34:24PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
[...]
> > diff --git a/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c
> > index ee4af898bcf6..552ae2b5e911 100644
> > --- a/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c
> > +++ b/arch/mips/kvm/emulate.c
> > @@ -865,7 +865,7 @@ enum emulation_result kvm_mips
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 08:49:59PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> The leading underscores denote that the call is just a bitop wrapper.
>
> Switch all users of open-coded set/check/test to kvm_request ones.
>
> Automated by coccinelle script:
> @@
> expression VCPU, REQ;
> @@
> -set_bit(REQ
Am 27.02.2017 um 11:02 schrieb David Hildenbrand:
> Am 24.02.2017 um 20:49 schrieb Radim Krčmář:
>> The leading underscores denote that the call is just a bitop wrapper.
>
> Actually, the leading underscore is misleading
>
> If we want to match the semantics of set/test/clear_bit, using a leading
Am 24.02.2017 um 20:49 schrieb Radim Krčmář:
> The leading underscores denote that the call is just a bitop wrapper.
Actually, the leading underscore is misleading
If we want to match the semantics of set/test/clear_bit, using a leading
underscore might feel like using the non-atomic variants lik
The leading underscores denote that the call is just a bitop wrapper.
Switch all users of open-coded set/check/test to kvm_request ones.
Automated by coccinelle script:
@@
expression VCPU, REQ;
@@
-set_bit(REQ, &VCPU->requests)
+__kvm_request_set(REQ, VCPU)
@@
expression VCPU, REQ;
9 matches
Mail list logo