On 16.01.20 13:05, Janosch Frank wrote:
> Let's remove a lot of badly formatted code by introducing the
> wait_for_flag() function.
>
> Also let's remove some stray spaces.
>
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> s390x/smp.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/s390x/smp.c b/s390x/smp.c
> index ab7e46c..02204fd 100644
> --- a/s390x/smp.c
> +++ b/s390x/smp.c
> @@ -22,6 +22,13 @@
>
> static int testflag = 0;
>
> +static void wait_for_flag(void)
> +{
> + while (!testflag) {
> + mb();
> + }
> +}
> +
> static void cpu_loop(void)
> {
> for (;;) {}
> @@ -37,13 +44,11 @@ static void test_func(void)
> static void test_start(void)
> {
> struct psw psw;
> - psw.mask = extract_psw_mask();
> + psw.mask = extract_psw_mask();
> psw.addr = (unsigned long)test_func;
>
> smp_cpu_setup(1, psw);
> - while (!testflag) {
> - mb();
> - }
> + wait_for_flag();
> report(1, "start");
> }
>
> @@ -98,6 +103,7 @@ static void test_store_status(void)
> report(1, "status written");
> free_pages(status, PAGE_SIZE * 2);
> report_prefix_pop();
> + smp_cpu_stop(1);
This hunk does not seem to belong into this patch.
Apart from that, looks good to me.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
