Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 May 2012 20:55:56 +0530 | From | "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpumask: add a few comments of cpumask functions |
| |
On 05/28/2012 07:19 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
> On 05/28/2012 08:47 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > >> On 05/28/2012 02:32 PM, Alex Shi wrote: >> >>> Current few cpumask function purpose are not quite clear. Stupid >>> user like myself need to dig into details for clear function >>> purpose and return value. >> >> >> You can just see how it is used elsewhere and figure it out ;-) >> Anyway, in principle, I don't have any objections to adding comments >> that are actually helpful. But I don't think all the comments this >> patch adds fall into that category.. >> >>> Add few explanation for them is helpful. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com> >>> --- >>> include/linux/cpumask.h | 6 ++++++ >>> 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpumask.h b/include/linux/cpumask.h >>> index a2c819d..8436e61 100644 >>> --- a/include/linux/cpumask.h >>> +++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h >>> @@ -271,6 +271,7 @@ static inline void cpumask_clear_cpu(int cpu, struct cpumask *dstp) >>> * cpumask_test_cpu - test for a cpu in a cpumask >>> * @cpu: cpu number (< nr_cpu_ids) >>> * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer >>> + * return 1 if the 'cpu' is in the old 'cpumask', otherwise return 0 >>> * >> >> >> s/return/Returns >> >> What do you mean by "old" cpumask? > > Thanks for comments! > Should be "the old bitmap of cpumask"? >
No, there is no "old" or "new" cpumask here because this function doesn't change the cpumask. It just checks if that bit is set. So something like: Returns 1 if 'cpu' is set in 'cpumask', else returns 0.
Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat
| |