On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 09:31:14AM -0300, Kevin Winchester wrote:
> 2009/8/11 tip-bot for Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(__u64, next_check) = INITIAL_JIFFIES;
> > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, thermal_throttle_count);
> > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, thermal_throttle_active);
> >
> > static atomic_t therm_throt_en = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
> >
> > @@ -96,24 +97,27 @@ static int therm_throt_process(int curr)
> > {
> > unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> > __u64 tmp_jiffs = get_jiffies_64();
> > + bool was_throttled = __get_cpu_var(thermal_throttle_active);
> > + bool is_throttled = __get_cpu_var(thermal_throttle_active) = curr;
>
> This seems a little odd (or perhaps my lack of experience is
> showing...) - should it be:
>
> bool is_throttled = __get_cpu_var(thermal_throttle_active) == curr;
>
> ?
No, you still want to assign the value to thermal_throttle_active.
is_throttled is just a temp so you don't need to invoke
__get_cpu_var(thermal_throttle_active) all over the function.
--
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|