lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] microblaze: add stack unwinder
Steven J. Magnani wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 18:45 +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>>> diff -uprN a/arch/microblaze/kernel/traps.c
>> b/arch/microblaze/kernel/traps.c
>>> --- a/arch/microblaze/kernel/traps.c 2010-04-09 21:52:36.000000000
>>> +++ b/arch/microblaze/kernel/traps.c 2010-04-12 22:16:01.000000000
> [snip]
>>>
>>> - if (!stack)
>>> - stack = (unsigned long *)&stack;
>>> + if (fp == 0) {
>>> + if (task)
>>> + fp = ((struct thread_info *)
>>> + (task->stack))->cpu_context.r1;
>>> + else {
>>> + /* Pick up caller of dump_stack() */
>>> + fp = (__u32)&sp - 8;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>> just coding style.
>>
>> if (fp == 0)
>> if (task)
>> fp = ((struct thread_info *)
>> (task->stack))->cpu_context.r1;
>> else
>> /* Pick up caller of dump_stack() */
>> fp = (__u32)&sp - 8;
>
> Do you feel strongly about this? I try to always use braces on if/else
> clauses that have more than one line. I've found that the extra
> characters are well worth the savings in debugging time when someone
> tries to extend the clause and forgets to add the braces.

It will work. I like brackets too. I agree that can save a lot of time
with debugging.

I just didn't like that inconsistency in if (task) part.

If is if (task) { ... } else {...} then I am ok with it if
checkpatch.pl doesn't report it as warning.


Michal



--
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel 2.6 Microblaze Linux - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-04-27 09:57    [W:0.061 / U:0.828 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site