On Tue 2020-05-05 17:05:37, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 4:37 PM Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue 2020-05-05 16:19:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 3:58 PM Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Tue 2020-05-05 15:51:16, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 3:37 PM Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > So, to the point, the conditional of checking the thread to be stopped being
> > > > > > > first part of conjunction logic prevents to check iterations. Thus, we have to
> > > > > > > always check both conditions
>
> vvv
> >>>>>> to be able to stop after given iterations.
> ^^^
_If_ you are already stopping due to kthread_should_stop(), you don't
need to check iterations.
If you are not stopping, iterations are always checked.
No, the new code does not "always check both conditions" as you claim.
> Yes. Please, read carefully the commit message (for your convenience I
> emphasized above). I don't want to spend time on this basics stuff
> anymore.
You may want to go through the basics once more. The change clearly
does not do what you said it does; in fact, it does not do anything.
> > If you wanted both conditions to always evaluate, you'd have to do
> >
> > # while (!kthread_should_stop()
> > # & !(params->iterations && total_tests >=
> > # params->iterations)) {
> >
> > (note && -> &). But, again, there's no reason to do that, as second
> > part of expression does not have side effects.
>
> It fixes a bug in the code, try with and without this change. (I can
> reproduce it here)
I'm not sure if you made mistake during testing, or if you have buggy
compiler or what...
Pavel
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
